Dne 23. 08. 22 v 0:36 Jilayne Lovejoy napsal(a):
That would be a bit hard since a large number of the SPDX ids are the same as the Fedora short names. That being said, some of the more commonly found licenses are not the same.
This is unfortunate. I still think it was mistake to not provide some mechanism to understand what license format is being used. It could have been empty macro such as `License: %{spdx:MIT}`.
Vít
It might be interesting to see how many packages have had a license update since this change, which could indicate updating to SPDX, as well as updating the license information more generally, as we've seen some cases of already. To be honest, I've been thinking more about how to efficiently deal with some of the "category" Fedora short names specifically (need more brainstorming on that), than overall progress. _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
