On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 1:45 AM Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Dne 04. 04. 23 v 3:20 Richard Shaw napsal(a): > > WARNING: This is a small rant... > > np :) > > I decided to look up my packages on src.fedoraproject.org (I'm still not sure if it's showing me all packages I'm admin of, or just main admin) and start working through them one by one. > > Thank you for doing that. Even if you give up at the end. > > > I have updated my licensecount script which summarises the licenses in a source and uses licensecheck to output SPDX licenses instead, but they output the "short" form as far as I can tell, not the form that we want in the SPEC file. > > Try: > > licensecheck --shortname-scheme=spdx -r . > > this gives me *almost* the wanted result: > > ./rpmconf.spec: *No copyright* GPL-3 > ./bin/rpmconf: GPL-3.0-or-later > ./rpmconf/rpmconf.py: GPL-3.0-or-later > > Last two lines are correct. The first line still use the short form. I consider it a isolated bug of licensecheck - feel free to report issue there. > It's not a bug in licensecheck. Licensecheck was written for Debian originally, and it uses DEP-5 as the core license standard. Debian does not plan to move to SPDX, but some effort was made to massage DEP-5 results into SPDX-like data. You can see the notes about this here: https://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
