minor nsca license nit

[Goldschrafe, Jeffrey]

Awesome going, it looks like the proposed names for the server and
client packages are the same as what I have, which saves me a heap of
trouble when I can start tracking EPEL packages directly in my local
repo.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net 
> [mailto:nagios-devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf 
> Of Michael Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 7:22 PM
> To: Nagios Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-devel] minor nsca license nit
> 
> Hi Jeff,
> 
> Goldschrafe, Jeffrey wrote:
> > I built annsca/nsca-client package for Fedora/CentOS for my 
> > institution from a few weeks ago that I never got around to 
> > submitting. Might I see what you've got, so my environment 
> doesn't get 
> > too out of line with what's eventually making it into Fedora?
> 
> The latest iteration can be found at:
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433547
> 
> Once accepted into Fedora, I plan to add it to the EPEL 
> repository as well so that it's available for RHEL/CentOS/SL systems.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --Wart
> 
> > Jeff Goldschrafe <goldschr at cshl.edu>
> > Systems Engineer
> > Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
> > 1 Bungtown Road
> > Cold Spring Harbor, NY 11724
> > (516) 367-6966
> > http://www.cshl.edu
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nagios-devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net
> >> [mailto:nagios-devel-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of 
> >> Michael Thomas
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 7:13 PM
> >> To: nagios-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> >> Subject: [Nagios-devel] minor nsca license nit
> >>
> >> I'm preparing a package for nsca for distribution with Fedora, and 
> >> ran into a small nit with respect to the license.
> >>  Fedora is getting pretty picky about having accurate licensing 
> >> information for packages, so I was hoping that someone here could 
> >> clear this up.
> >>
> >> All of the *.c and *.h sourcce files for nsca claim to be valid for
> >> GPLv2 and later, except for nsca.c and send_nsca.c which 
> simply say:
> >>   * License: GPL v2
> >> That is, these two files omit the 'or (at your option) any later 
> >> version' clause.
> >>
> >> Is the intended license for nsca 'GPLv2 only', or 'GPLv2 
> or later'?  
> >> Are there any upcoming releases planned that might be able 
> to include 
> >> this clarification?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> --Wart
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -----------
> >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. 
> >> Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> >> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nagios-devel mailing list
> >> Nagios-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-devel
> >>
> > 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all 
> challenges. 
> > Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nagios-devel mailing list
> > Nagios-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-devel
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all 
> challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Nagios-devel mailing list
> Nagios-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-devel
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/