On Monday, July 25, 2016 1:31:58 PM CDT Tom Callaway wrote: > On 07/24/2016 12:13 AM, Haïkel wrote: > > 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. > > I've been working on and off with SPDX to ensure that there is as > minimal as possible deviation between our two lists. > > If we did want to move forward with this, we'd need to figure out how to > resolve the inconsistencies with BSD/MIT between Fedora and SPDX. > Additionally, since pretty much every single package would need to be > touched for this change (as well as every package awaiting review), this > would not be a small effort, and I am _not_ volunteering to undertake it > alone, as I do not have the time. > > I tend be of the opinion that the work involved vastly outweighs the > benefit, but if others disagree (and are willing to volunteer their time > to work on this), I could be convinced. > > ~tom A way to deal with it could be to enance rpmdev-bumpspec that we use in mass rebuilds. or one of the other mass rebuild script, or for that matter if we had a script that could do the conversion we could integare it into the mass rebuild process. I am willing to make the changes needed to make it happen as part of the next mass rebuild. It would require someone to script the conversion from what we have to SPDX. it would still take time to propagate everywhere. We would probably want to extend rpmlint and the review scripts to throw a warning on it. Dennis _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
