Is a disjunctive license that includes CC0-1.0 as one of the options
acceptable for Fedora? I'm intending to submit perl-Crypt-Argon2 for
Fedora review and the C source code files [2] say:
"You may use this work under the terms of a Creative Commons CC0 1.0
License/Waiver or the Apache Public License 2.0, at your option."
But some of the files only mention CC0-1.0. In the github [2] only
dist.ini mentions CC0-1.0 without Apache-2.0, but on CPAN [1] this is
expanded to README, LICENSE, lib/Crypt/Argon2.pm and
script/argon2-calibrate.
I'd like to ask upstream to add a dual-license with Apache-2.0
everywhere CC0-1.0 is mentioned, but only if that would be an
acceptable result.
dist.ini:
name = Crypt-Argon2
author = Leon Timmermans <leont(a)cpan.org>
license = CC0_1_0
copyright_holder = Daniel Dinu, Dmitry Khovratovich, Jean-Philippe Aumasson, Samuel Neves,
Thomas Pornin and Leon Timmermans
copyright_year = 2013
LICENSE:
"Daniel Dinu, Dmitry Khovratovich, Jean-Philippe Aumasson, Samuel Neves, Thomas
Pornin and Leon Timmermans has dedicated the work to the Commons by waiving all of his
or her rights to the work worldwide under copyright law and all related or
neighboring legal rights he or she had in the work, to the extent allowable by law.
Works under CC0 do not require attribution. When citing the work, you should
not imply endorsement by the author.
Creative Commons Legal Code
CC0 1.0 Universal
[...trimmed full license text...]"
[1]
https://metacpan.org/dist/Crypt-Argon2
[2]
https://github.com/Leont/crypt-argon2