add LGPL license metadata to gemspec #44
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As indicated in the COPYING file, a small portion of the code is likely LGPL.
Merged
ktdreyer
changed the title
|
Mind merging this in? |
|
Hi piki, I ran this by Fedora legal team this week, and here's their response: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2014-October/002509.html It seems that the LGPL tag should be added to the gemspec. |
|
The original authors OK'd it. Dual-license it is. |
piki
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 30, 2014
add LGPL license metadata to gemspec
|
That's really great. Thanks for merging. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request allows RubyGems.org and other tools (such as gem2rpm) to correctly report the licenses for your gem.