Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Re: [SPDX] Mass license change GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only

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

 



On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:24:44AM -0600, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
> On 6/19/24 6:07 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > Relatedly, I have had some misgivings and mixed feelings about these
> > mass conversions, because I have worried that the resulting situation
> > will make people complacent regarding the correctness of the license
> > tag. That is, they may assume that a converted license tag has some
> > sort of implied stamp of approval. However, I've mostly gotten
> > comfortable with the piecemeal
> > mass conversions over time. I accept that we'll (still) have many
> > inaccurate license tags, under our current documented standards, and
> > we'll just have to gradually try to improve them.
> +1 I also had a lot of misgivings. In addition to Richard's comments, I
> think I've come to thinking that complacency is an issue no matter what and
> any amount of auto-conversion is not likely to make that worse or better.
> > 
> > I'm not sure it's really better to stick with Callaway license tags
> > for some longer period of time in the hope that the *first* attempt to
> > convert a package license tag to SPDX expressions will be relatively
> > accurate. I do worry that if everyone is complacent about this, Fedora
> > could become yet another project using SPDX expressions
> > inappropriately.
> really don't want that!
> 
> In any case, Miro, I appreciate your observations and concerns. I think in
> the long run, putting in place more specific advice and better tooling for
> license review that is maybe even part of the packaging process would be
> better. Even for the packages that were diligently updated to SPDX ids won't
> stay up-to-date over time as packages change their licenses, etc.

+1 for continuing the (imperfect) convertion to SPDX.

For me the argument that the non-simplified licenses have to be
periodically adjusted anyway to not become outdated is fairly convicing.

I think we're better off having a possibly-incomplete SPDX format
license than a possibly-incomplete-in-the-same-way Spot format
license. We'll be better off having the whole distro converted to a
consistent format, even if some of the tags still need to expanded
later.

Zbyszek
--
_______________________________________________
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




[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