Once upon a time, Gary Buhrmaster <gary.buhrmaster@xxxxxxxxx> said: > The follow up suggested that the license > field be differently formatted. > > I disagree with such explanatory > prefixes, as it requires yet more apps > to parse/support various prefixes. No, my suggestion of using "License: SPDX:<foo>" would not require any additional changes. Anything that cares about the License field will already need changes to recongize the SPDX values; this would just remove any ambiguity. And as very little parses the License field, so there's not some big effort to update required in any case. I just made this suggestion as a way to avoid anything unclear in the License field, but it would also allow any future alternate license strings to be clearly used. -- Chris Adams <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
