On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 3:12 AM Benson Muite <benson_muite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The Apache 2 and GPL conflict seems well known. There are 1012 packages > in the repositories with both GPL and Apache licenses: > $ dnf repoquery --all --info > allpackageinfo.txt > $ cat allpackageinfo.txt | grep -n "ASL.* GPL" >> GPLonly_AND_APACHE.txt > $ cat allpackageinfo.txt | grep -n "Apache.* GPL" >> GPLonly_AND_APACHE.txt > $ cat allpackageinfo.txt | grep -n " GPL.*ASL" >> GPLonly_AND_APACHE.txt > $ cat allpackageinfo.txt | grep -n " GPL.*Apache" >> GPLonly_AND_APACHE.txt > $ wc -l GPLonly_AND_APACHE.txt > > Need to check that either GPL license is the main one that applies with > Apache licensed software included in GPL software but no GPL software in > Apache licensed software or separate Apache and GPL packages are produced: > https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html > > Maybe there are other well known cases that should be documented and > perhaps put in the review tool? I would discourage having the review tool attempt to flag license compatibility issues. My assumption, based on past experience, is that in the vast majority of cases we would conclude after careful (and sometimes even quick) analysis that there is no actual issue of license incompatibility. So I think having this in the review tool will just add mostly unnecessary friction. Richard _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-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/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
