On 06/17/2014 05:58 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 06:24 PM, Pat Riehecky wrote:
>> From: Pat Riehecky <riehecky@fnal.gov>
>>
>> I realized the scripts I've been sending in weren't licensed.
>>
>> So, I've added one to show_possible_srpms.sh.
>>
>> Perhaps we should talk about getting the rest of the tools
>> under an open source license.
>>
>> Pat Riehecky (1):
>>    Realized this was missing a license, added
>>
> any specific reason to go with GPLv3 ?
>
>

Not really, just seemed like a workable choice for a pile of scripts.

Pat

--
Pat Riehecky

Scientific Linux developer
http://www.scientificlinux.org/

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel