Re: Is man-pages-posix redistributable?

[Christoph Erhardt <fedora@sicherha.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1693 bytes --]

Anyone?

My preferred answer would be 'your question is stupid; *of course* man-pages-
posix is redistributable'. So if that is indeed the case, please don't 
hesitate to say so. ;-)

Thanks,
Christoph

On Monday, 29 August 2022 08:14:22 CEST Christoph Erhardt wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> I have a question regarding the redistribution of man-pages-posix.
> Prior to the 2017-a release, the POSIX_COPYRIGHT file contained the
> following
> paragraph:
> > Redistribution of this material is permitted so long as this notice and
> > the corresponding notices within each POSIX manual page are retained on
> > any distribution, and the nroff source is included. Modifications to
> > the text are permitted so long as any conflicts with the standard
> > are clearly marked as such in the text.
> 
> In the 2017-a release, that paragraph has disappeared. I would like to
> clarify the implications of that for downstream distributions.
> 
> The Fedora project, which is known to be very strict about licensing
> concerns, sees the new licence as impermissible and has dropped the POSIX
> man pages as a consequence:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2116859
> 
> Now, Fedora's quasi-official way of dealing with such licensing issues would
> be to add the item in question to RPM Fusion's 'nonfree' package
> repository. I have opened an inclusion request:
> https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6396
> 
> However, the discussion there has raised the question whether the contents
> of man-pages-posix are redistributable *at all* - given that the clause
> mentioning redistribution has vanished from the licence.
> 
> Could someone please clarify?
> 
> Thanks a lot,
> Christoph


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]