On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 8:40 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 10:49:15AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 25. 05. 22 v 2:44 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > > > 2) There are tags that might mean slightly different things in each > > > notation. E.g. MIT. Is this package licensed with the SPDX MIT? Or is it > > > a old-style MIT that might mean different SPDX notation? Note that the > > > old-style MIT seems to be a superset of SPDX MIT, so this isn't probably > > > getting worse than it is, it's just a tad confusing. > > > > I think that we can assume that if > > > > gitlog --pretty=oneline > > > > contains `spdx` or similar string, than the spec file use the new notation. > > Ewwww, please no. Apps need to know whether a given RPM is using SPDX > or not, independantly of whether they have Fedora git source history > available. We just need to record this fact in the specfile explicitly, > so it is available both to maintainers and to any apps parsing the > spec and to any apps querying the installed RPMDB. > I think people assume we do more with the License tag than we actually do. We have no active automated auditing or validation of package license tags at this time. That may come in later phases, and lead to total conversion to SPDX identifiers, but right now, this is overthinking the problem way too much. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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
