On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:22:15AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:47:55AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > > > > Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you make the comment something like this? > > > > > > > > > > > > # Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2 > > > > > > # TODO check if there are other licenses to be listed > > > > > > License: GPL-2.0-only > > > > > > > > > > We (the Change owners) discussed this on a meeting today. And we agreed on output: > > > > > > > > > > # Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2 > > > > > # TODO convert to correct SPDX identifier > > > > > # See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/update-existing-packages/ > > > > > License: LicenseRef-Callaway-GPLv2 > > > > > > > > > > This is valid SPDX identifier. But not on the list of Fedora's allowed > > > > > licenses, so any QA tool will remind you to check the license. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > I don't understand what is the benefit of doing this at all. Sorry. > > > > > > The benefit I see is that it immediately causes all license tags to > > > conform to the SPDX license expression standard, while also making it > > > very clear what parts of those license expressions are actually legacy > > > elements that have to be examined and replaced. (This assumes we > > > wouldn't use `LicenseRef-Callaway-` for any other purpose.) > > > > What is the benefit of that outcome? > > > > I understand the benefit of SPDX in general. > > > > I don't understand the benefit of converting everything to custom LicenseRef > > identifiers. > > If you have tools which process SPDX expressions, with a full conversion > of outstanding RPMs to LicenseRef, you would now be able to use these > tools on Fedora specfiles (more) reliably. Another advantage is that it makes it (painfully) obvious when the legacy license tag is used. Instead of a free-style comment in the spec file or having to dig through %changelog to see if it mentions SPDX, the information that the license needs reviewing/updating is available in machine-readable form from the License tag. You can even use repoquery to list all such cases. > Fedora could (should) also apply CI tests that enforce a valid SPDX > expression, as there are almost certainly some accidental errors that > have crept in (I know I've made some). Yeah, I think we'll want to add a linter for this once the conversion is mostly complete. We can't really do that now. > These are small, but still tangible benefits, over having the ill-defined > mixture of SPDX and Callaway expressions live on for more years. > > Fully replacing the LicenseRef-Callaway terms within the expressions > would still remain highly desirable, ongoing work. 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
