[Sugar-devel] Activity & SoaS Licensing Concerns

[Sebastian Dziallas]

Sebastian Dziallas wrote:
> Sebastian Dziallas wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I've lately taken the task of packaging more activities to get us a
>> reasonably user experience for the next iteration of SoaS. The normal
>> review process requires an application to be properly and clearly
>> licensed. I'd like to encourage activity authors to work on getting
>> these clarifications, if needed, committed into GIT.
>>
>> For example, if your activity doesn't contain a license file that states
>> unambiguously the licenses of the *whole* activity and all of its
>> bundled libraries, a kind of per-file licensing would be good, as some
>> files would be otherwise without a license specification.
>>
>> I'm not trying to make things up here, but am rather just realistic, as
>> such things are simply blockers. I'll try to follow up with people...
>
> Actually, another topic is the SoaS boot screen. Since we need to get
> that packaged in Fedora in time (meaning basically as soon as possible),
> we need to have a public location where we host a tarball or a GIT repo
> of the boot screen picture files, together with licensing information.
>
> Can I just move ahead and put them in git.sl.o?

Just to make sure everybody understands what this is about. If we are 
unable clarify this, there won't be a boot screen specifically for SoaS 
at all.

If nobody complains by the end of this weekend, I'll just upload the 
images, put a GPLv2+ license in the archive and make a tarball, as this 
is what they've been listed under in Strawberry and Blueberry, too.

--Sebastian

>> Thanks,
>> --Sebastian
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel