Re: SPDX Statistics - Voyager 2 edition

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


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

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

Having valid SPDX identifier is not enough. The identifier must be on SPDX list **and** on fedora-license-data list

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:
List Guidelines:
List Archives:
Do not reply to spam, report it:

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux