On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 14:03 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > I would like a FC7 goal of having at least the spec files patched to > use the same 'terms' in every License: tag. GPL, Gnu Public License > V2, etc makes a job for someone who has to look at these things for a > 'site' harder. I would like to have the terms to be standardized a bit > more to something like: > > License: GPL (see COPYING for complete versions) > License: Various (see LICENSES for versions and files applied) > > etc. That way a person can go see that the license(s) is there, what > file(s) are it in etc. > > Having each packager go through that rigamarole might have them think > : "Hmmm this code turns out to be CDDL/GPL/SCO combined code. Maybe I > should find something else." What to do with the License: field in the spec file is on the Packaging Committee's agenda. We haven't drafted any proposals yet but discussion seems to be headed towards "License field is just a hint about what the actual license is". Where that leads next is kinda up in the air. If you'd like to join in, discussion goes on in the fedora-packaging mailing list and #fedora-packaging on freenode. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
