[Buildbot-devel] Licensing clarification

Gianluca Sforna giallu at gmail.com
Sun Oct 14 18:02:05 UTC 2007

On 10/14/07, Dustin J. Mitchell <dustin at zmanda.com> wrote:
> To be clear, nothing is a legal requirement.  Brian can put "This file
> is covered under Brian's Fun License" on line 27 of every third source
> file, if he wants -- it just wouldn't be very helpful when it came
> time to defend his copyright in court.  So let's be clear -- the FSF
> *recommends* that every source file contain a copyright statement
> including years and an author, as well as an indication of the file's
> license.  At no point does it *require* such.  See
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html.

Ahem... This was exactly what I wanted to express :) sorry for my poor

> Discussion of the BSD/Linux wifi licensing conflict revealed the
> reason for adding licenses at a per-file level: if source under
> another license is included (either by a contributor, or by
> incorporation of some utility library), it is much easier to indicate
> the difference in licenses on a per-file basis.  There be other legal
> implications to licensing at the project level.

Yes. I think that now there is more awareness about the issue: I am
sure Brian will do what is best for the good of the project.

> At the bottom line, though, the decision comes down to a matter of
> policy for the Fedora project, since it is your choice whether to
> include buildbot in Fedora 8.

I'm pretty sure the original reply from Brian is good enough: the
License field I need to fill is just used to cross check packages
licenses and avoid possible confilcts, listed at:




More information about the devel mailing list