On 05.07.2016 03:30, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Monday, July 4, 2016 6:02:52 PM CDT Sandro Mani wrote:
Hi
Upstream has moved licensecheck to a new stand-alone package and removed
it from devscripts-2.16.6 onwards.
I've packaged licensecheck, along with a dependency, review requests are
here:
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352666 :
perl-Pod-Constants - Include constants from POD
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352667 : licensecheck -
Simple license checker for source files
I have a question about the upgrade path though:
The current situation is:
devscripts-minimal:
- licensecheck
- checkbashism
The new situation would be:
devscripts-minimal:
- checkbashisms
licensecheck:
- licensecheck
Since devscripts-minimal will only contain checkbashisms, I'd plan to
introduce a devscripts-checkbashisms package with that script, and keep
devscripts-minimal (temporarily?) as a metapackage which requires
devscripts-checkbashisms and licensecheck. So:
devscripts-minimal:
Requires: devscripts-checkbashisms
Requires: licensecheck
Does this make sense? I suppose I still need Obsoletes:
devscripts-minimal < 2.16.6 in both licensecheck and
devscripts-checkbashisms?
Thanks
Sandro
Hey Sandro,
What exactly does licensecheck do? and how is it different to the procject at
https://sourceforge.net/projects/oslc/ I ask because I would like to have us
implement something to check licensing when people upload tarballs to
lookaside cache and report when licenses change.
Dennis
Hi Dennis
licensecheck simply scans files for license headers and prints out the
detected license for each file (it is used by fedora-review for
instance). I suppose the perl library introduced with the new
licensecheck package offers some flexibility for third-party use. I
don't know oslc, but it doesn't seem to be actively maintained?
Sandro
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
