https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1985620 --- Comment #8 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #5) > (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #2) > > As I understand it under > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > > LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text, you will have to wait for upstream to > > add license text in response to > > https://github.com/jeremyschulman/django3-auth-saml2/issues/10, or add what > > you believe to be the correct license text yourself. It doesn’t seem like > > packaging without license text is an option. > > As far as I know, this is not correct. It's not up the packager to just > "guess" which license text is applicable. > So it's better to just specify which license upstream intended, file an > issue with upstream that the license file is missing, and link that issue > from the .spec file. fedora-review even has a checkbox for "does not include > license files separate from those supplied by upstream". When it comes to "standard" licenses, there is no guessing involved, so it's fine. The problem comes when something is BSD/MIT licensed. We *can't* ship anything that is supposedly BSD or MIT licensed without the original license text from the software because those can be anything. There's hundreds of license variants in that category. The Apache, GNU, and Mozilla licenses, on the other hand, are standardized and well-known, so it's not as much of an issue that the license text isn't in the repo, as long as the issue has been reported upstream or a patch has been submitted to add it. I know Tom does this quite a lot for packages that have missing license texts. As soon as upstream accepts the patch, he can ship it downstream in Fedora. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ 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
