On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 9:43 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/05/2023 14:33, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > It would probably be better if the legal docs made this explicit, and > > made Rust no longer a special case. The fact that only Rust is called > > out is an artifact of this rule having been moved from the Rust > > Packaging Guidelines to the legal docs, but other languages that are in > > similar situations didn't even have guidelines for this case. > > I have the opposite opinion. Even Rust packages should only include to > the License tag libraries bundled into the source tarball. > > All other licenses can be traced, if necessary, from the corresponding > -devel packages. > > If one had to manually track each header-only library in the dependency > tree, check their licenses, and document them in the License tag, that > would add useless extra work to the maintainers. It must be automated. Sure, I don't like the way we need to do this for Rust packages either ... But like it or not, your opinion doesn't really matter if Red Hat Legal says we need to do it this way. At least for Rust packages, we do have some amount of automation now to help with this chore. Fabio _______________________________________________ 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
