Re: SPDX Statistics - Dvořák Edition

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

 



Dne 27. 09. 24 v 4:01 odp. Ben Beasley napsal(a):

The list of packages without SPDX, packages-without-spdx-final-maintainers.txt, seems suspicious. It has quite a few packages I maintain that seem perfectly fine to me.

----

NiaAML-GUI has:

    # SPDX
    License:        MIT

and a commit/changelog in its history entitled “Clarify that License is SPDX MIT”.

The reasons are in the first file:

https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-final.txt

for NiaAML-GUI it states:

> NiaAML-GUI warning: valid as old and new and no changelong entry, please check

hmm... you are right, I had a error in my script in detection of dist-git changelog. Next time it will not be reported.

-- 
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

[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