On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 22:27 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > Today, FESCo ratified a new policy for handling the License tag inside > > of package spec files. > > > > You can read the new Licensing Guidelines here: > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines > > > > What does this mean for Fedora package maintainers? It means that you're > > going to need to do a little bit of work. We want F8 packages to have > > the correct license tag before we release F8. > > > > Okay, 2 more questions: > > 1: Currently the short for "zlib License" is just zlib. However most current > zlib licensed packages currently contain the following as License tag: > "zlib/libpng License" as that is what rpmlint wants. Changing all these tags > merely because someone thought zlib would be more descriptive feels very wrong. > I'm all for one standard for this. But why deviate from the table in rpmlint, a > tool long used for reviews, in cases where this isn't necessary. Also I believe > that no matter whats gets choisen as short form the long one should be > "zlib/libpng License" and not just "zlib License", as now a days its most often > refered to as the "zlib/libpng License" see for example: > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/zlib-license.php We've actually fixed rpmlint to match the new license table. :) I'll update the long name to be "zlib/libpng License". > 2: Why aren't the ND variants of the CC licenses allowed for content? > > Quoting from: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-8be956fd12dbe4ae927e65c989e7e83b9fcc0b80 > 'In this case, the gamedata files can be packaged and included in Fedora, as > long as the files meet the requirements for binary firmware.' > > And then quoting from: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-adf31c383612aac313719f7b4f8167b7dcf245d2 > 'The License tag for any firmware that disallows modification should be set to: > "Redistributable, no modification permitted"' > > On basis of this the Games SIG has long been reviewing and approving game > datafiles which lack permission to modify. Especially for for example music it > is quite common for the artist to say: "You may do with this as you want, but > you may not modify it, I made it and to me it is perfect as it is, so either > take it as it is, or leave it". Its an oversight, I'll amend it now. Thanks for pointing that out. ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
