https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1913870 Otto Urpelainen <oturpe@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(ti.eugene@gmail.c | |om) --- Comment #21 from Otto Urpelainen <oturpe@xxxxxx> --- (In reply to Eugene A. Pivnev from comment #20) > (In reply to Otto Urpelainen from comment #19) > > The licensing issues I still have: > > > > 1. It really should be "MIT and LGPLv3 and BSD", without splitting it with > > parenthesis. The crucial question is: What license(s) apply to binary > > qvgeapp? The answer is, all of them, so the triplet a unit. But since the > > License field is a rabbit hole when bundled dependecies are present (e.g. we > > could start discussing the auxiliary files apart from the binary…), so I > > will just suggest you go with my suggestion, but not demand any changes at > > this point, close enough I say. > > So, we get back to previous, right? > https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qvge/qvge-0.6.2-3.spec > Yes. I still think that the correct solution would be "(MIT and LGPLv3 and BSD)", but Ben's arguments earlier convinced me that the parenthesis are optional in this case. > > 2. qtpropertybrowser's license file is still missing. So either add > > LICENSE.qtpropertybrowser as well (need to work with upstream here, because > > the do not have anything suitable, README.qsint is close, but is ruined by > > its header above the license proper), or change the naming scheme to > > LICENCE.LGPLv3, etc. > > As far as I know I cannot add license text to other sources with myself > (excluding _extra_ordinary situation). > Real use-case: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1845322# Best to start with a reference to Licensing Guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text What you are not allowed to do is to add a license text that cannot be found upstream. The solution is to add it upstream first, then consume the addition in Fedora. Of course in this case, qvge has copied qtpropertybrowser source from somewhere, so they cannot decide on a license, but comply with whatever license is in force. > But from other side as a) qtpropertybrowser really has no license text in > separate file and b) not maintained for a long time > I'm planning to include head of it's source as license text: > https://github.com/qtproject/qt-solutions/blob/master/qtpropertybrowser/src/ > qtpropertybrowser.h > As it is not real license text then this will be LICENSE.qtpropertybrowser That is a good approach. But you should use the head from qvge's copy of that file. It seems Qt has been editing their licenses slightly, since we are packaging what qvge uses, we should use the license that was used to distribute their copy. The difference seems to be tiny in this case, but that is the right license to use. Do not just patch it into Fedora package, but submit it upstream, then use that for Fedora. If that fails, the guidelines have options for dealing with missing license in case upstream is not willing to fix the issue in their end. > PS. README.qsint is because it is not pure license text but is real README > file. IMHO I have no right to rename README into LICENSE if upstream decide > to name it as is. That file name is annoying and confusing, but still ok. It is in the licenses directory and the content is clear, so it is good enough. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
