2016-07-24 1:53 GMT+02:00 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > Haïkel <hguemar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> 3. execute the change (packagers + provenpackagers), > > Honestly I feel this should instead be: > > 3. execute the change (people who want this) > That's likely a misunderstanding (I'm not a native speaker), packagers will be encouraged to do it, but not *forced* to do it themselves. Ultimately it will be left to the change owners to do it and it's not feasible without a set of volunteering provenpackagers as it's a distro-wide change. I also volunteered to do it in the initial mail. > Figuring out the proper tag could potentially involve a re-review of the > licensing of a large number of packages, to account for the situations > where there isn't simply a 1-to-1 mapping between our current tags and > this new setup. > Considering version 2.0, this is likely to be a short list and wouldn't be better to fix it in that standardization body. And we're already using SPDX in gnome software. > There just isn't enough obvious benefit (to me, anyway, though I really > doubt I'm alone) to push this change through without a set of people > already lined up to do the work. > *nods* >> As we have already standardized our licensing nomenclature, it would >> easily automatable (update git but not necessarily with rebuild). > > If it's that easy, the script to convert everything should also be > provided by those who want this change. Or at least a really simple set > of instructions between what we now have and what you would want us to > have. I'd expect to see that document pretty much up front, before > anyone else sinks time into this. > This discussion lost some context, but I offered to write that tooling last year (which was to me a prerequisite for submitting a change) At this stage, without Fedora Legal green light, it's useless to request FPC input and submitting a Fedora system-wide change with proper documentation and tooling. > Also, this gets us away from the current process of "ask fedora-legal if > you see some new license" to... something else, since we no longer > control the tags. Someone needs to document the "something else", and > preferably set up some Fedora contact who will handle whatever > interaction is needed with whatever standards group is involved. > > - J< that only changes the nomenclature, not that process. I don't know all the details, but Spot is listed among the contributors, we're maybe already involved even indirectly to that effort. But yes, we need a representative from Fedora Legal but that's likely part of the decision. H. _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
