|
 |
87447fb |
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 21:40:28 -0700
|
|
|
87447fb |
From: "Jason Kuri" <bsdmac@gmail.com>
|
|
|
87447fb |
To: "L. Gabriel Somlo" <somlo@cmu.edu>
|
|
|
87447fb |
Subject: Re: license question re. Catalyst-Authentication-Store-DBIx-Class
|
|
|
87447fb |
|
|
|
87447fb |
Hi Gabriel,
|
|
|
87447fb |
|
|
|
87447fb |
Yes, it is under the same license. It was just an oversight that it
|
|
|
87447fb |
doesn't have the same information in the file. I will endeavor to add
|
|
|
87447fb |
it for an upcoming release
|
|
|
87447fb |
|
|
|
87447fb |
Jay
|
|
|
87447fb |
|
|
|
87447fb |
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:28 PM, L. Gabriel Somlo <somlo@cmu.edu> wrote:
|
|
|
87447fb |
> Jason,
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> I've created an RPM package of Catalyst-Authentication-Store-DBIx-Class
|
|
|
87447fb |
> and submitted it for inclusion in Fedora.
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> I've been asked to clarify the licensing of SimpleDB.pm before the
|
|
|
87447fb |
> package can be included in the official Fedora repository. Both
|
|
|
87447fb |
> User.pm and Class.pm contain information about licensing directly
|
|
|
87447fb |
> within the respective files, but SimpleDB.pm does not.
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> Can you quickly confirm that SimpleDB.pm is subject to the same
|
|
|
87447fb |
> licensing terms as the other two modules ?
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> Also, would you consider adding a licensing blurb directly within
|
|
|
87447fb |
> SimpleDB.pm to avoid any similar questions in the future ? :)
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> Thanks much,
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
> --Gabriel
|
|
|
87447fb |
>
|
|
|
87447fb |
|