Dne 22. 08. 23 v 21:05 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
There's four packages that use "MPL-2.0+" which is not a valid SPDX identifier.
Not sure what to do about them, since I don't want to ignore upstream
license specification and change them to just "MPL-2.0".
I checked the sized-chunks
https://crates.io/crates/sized-chunks
And while the metadata states MPL-2.0+ the License file exactly match SPDX id "MPL-2.0". Changing it downstream is
correct way. But of course communicating it to upstream and change it in upstream metadata is even better. :)
The rest use valid SPDX identifiers but they're not recognized as such.
As others have already mentioned, the deprecated identifiers for
suffix-less GPL/LGPL variants should be accepted, or at most raise a
warning.
Having valid SPDX identifier is not enough. The identifier must be on SPDX list **and** on fedora-license-data list
https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
_______________________________________________
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
