I asked this question a while ago on the packaging mailing list [0], but
did not receive any replies. Let me try again here on devel with more
subscribers:
During the package review of qvge [1], the following question came up:
Are the any requirements placed on the contents of AppStream metadata,
particularly the field project_license [2]? It feels natural that is
MUST be the same (modulo differences in notation) as specfile License,
since both have the same meaning. However, I cannot find anything in
Licensing Guidelines about this.
In my experience, this comes up quite often, since upstreams often have
bundled dependencies or other copy-pasted code with different license
than upstream's own code, yet AppStream metadata, LICENSE file, README
and so only list upstream's own license.
[0]:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/HMDNWXRVTW37E5TOY6SU2BJ24KFJNZLY/
[1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913870
[2]:
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Metadata.html#tag-project_license
Otto
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
