On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 08:05 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > - To keep using "GPL or Artistic" for perl doesn't make much sense to > > me, since we are trying to differentiate clearly the different GPL > > versions. Is it "GPLv2+ or Artistic"? "GPLv2 or Artistic"? > > This is a valid point, but I can already hear the perl packagers > screaming again. :) > > > - If we use only " and " and " or " (with spaces around them), wouldn't > > the field still be reliably parseable, yet easier to read? And more > > coherent with the "GPL* or Artistic" from the perl packages? > > My concern about having scripts that try to parse "and" or "or" as a > separator is that we have to be especially careful about license short > identifiers. No "Random", "Korn", "Floor", (or to give an actual > relevant example, "Condor", which is currently in the list). Using && > and || prevents us from having parsing mistakes. I suppose we could > parse on _and/_or...but even then, a hypothetical "Andover" license > would throw us off. It's still doable, we'd just have to be very careful > how it is implemented. > Oh, come on, \band\b is not that hard. Using some awkward notation is making the life of every packager harder, for the benefit of the one person who implements the parser. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
