Dne 26.7.2016 v 03:54 Richard Fontana napsal(a): > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:31:58PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote: >> 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. > The main problem is exemplified by the BSD/MIT case, but it's not > limited to that. We have a number of instances where a Fedora license > tag refers to a set of things that are (usefully, I increasingly > believe) treated as multiple licenses in the SPDX universe. BSD and > MIT are just the extremes. I.e. it's not just a case of conceptually > equivalent standards that just happen to use different tokens for > things. > > Would it be possible to gradually evolve towards the SPDX system, say > on a voluntary basis (by package maintainer), making use of the > existing RPM license field? For example, say some Fedora package foo > today has "License: LGPLv2+" and let's further say that the code is > clearly licensed under LGPL version 2.1 or later. Could we move to a > voluntary system where the foo package maintainer can opt to change > that to "License: LGPLv2+ (SPDX: LGPL-2.1+)"? Or does that not even > make sense? This seems to be double work. Why not start to use SPDX one day and use it voluntarily only for new/updated packages? And one day, we will have all packages using SPDX. Actually, if there should be something automated, it could be usefull to add during next mass rebuild some comment above license tag, that the license is in Fedora format and after the mass rebuild, every updated package would need to use SPDX and the comment would be deleted by packager ... Vít _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
