On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 04:41:04PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 6:58 PM Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 10 2023 at 04:17:13 PM -0500, Matthew Miller
> > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Yeah, this is a change from previous guidance. Instead of trying to
> > > calculate
> > > the effect, just state what's there. Even if it makes the expression
> > > kind of
> > > long and unwieldy.
> > >
> >
> > Just for avoidance of doubt: this guidance is completely impractical
> > and it can only be followed for simple packages.
>
> I can only agree here.
> For example, for many non-trivial Rust packages, just "listing what's
> there" without doing some amount of simplification will result in
> License tags that are >100 characters long. I don't know if there's
> any limit to the length of RPM headers, but if there is, we might hit
> the limit with the "guidance" ...
It is true that the License tags going forward will be longer. One that we
have continued looking at ("we" being those of us working closely on the SPDX
changes in Fedora) is the texlive package. It currently has:
Apache-2.0 AND Artistic-2.0 AND CC0-1.0 AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND CC-BY-SA-3.0 AND CC-BY-SA-4.0 AND GPL-2.0-only AND GPL-2.0-or-later AND GPL-3.0-or-later AND LGPL-2.1-or-later AND LPPL-1.2 AND LPPL-1.3c AND MIT AND LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain AND LicenseRef-Utopia
For the main package's license tag. And that's....276 characters? There may
be longer examples.
The length here should not stop us from collecting this information.
Consistent licensing information in the packages is important. Note the
guidance states "an enumeration of all licenses covering any code or other
material contained in the corresponding binary RPM". This means licenses that
appear in build scripts, GNU autotools helper scripts, and other things in the
source tree that are not part of the built code in the corresponding binary
RPM do not need to be part of the License tag.
Thanks,
--
David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT
_______________________________________________
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
