--- Comment #20 from Göran Uddeborg <goeran(a)uddeborg.se> 2010-12-11 12:18:56 ---
I can't see any advantage in labelling the License as
"Meka" or "BSD-like"
(even though I prefer the former) over Distributable
The problem I see with "distributable" is that it doesn't say anything.
packages in the repo are distributable, whether it is closed source and no
modifications allowed nvidia drivers, or a very free package like the core bits
Anyway, this is really up to you. You are the reviewer and I have to
I am trying to CONVINCE you, but I won't ENFORCE my view. Especially since the
rules for the license part is slightly fuzzy, since it is one area where
RPMfusion differs from Fedora. If you add "and non-commercial" to the license,
I will accept this package, even though I personally think "Meka" or
would be better than "distributable".
By the way, I see the relation between packager and reviewer more as a
cooperation than as one person judging the other. (And I am not saying this
just because we have the roles reversed for m2vmp2cut! :-)
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.