On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:17 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The weirdest license expression is the one for perl-Exporter-Tidy[1], > which requires us to evaluate the entire list of acceptable licenses > and export them to the License tag since the license terms state as > such[2]. Outside of that, only crazy packages like Chromium wind up > having complex licensing. The rest are reasonably simple. > > [1]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-Exporter-Tidy > [2]: https://metacpan.org/pod/Exporter::Tidy#LICENSE I think for that one it would be better to treat the contents of that LICENSE file as a unique license (that happens to incorporate some set of OSI-approved licenses that may vary at any given point in time). > The point of the License tag in Fedora is to provide good guidance on > leveraging the software. If you want total accuracy, then you need > per-file license metadata. That's even *more* prone to errors, and > isn't even useful in most cases. I would prefer simpler, > understandable expressions than crazy accurate ones. For example, if > we changed to per-file accuracy, we'd need to start documenting all > the autotools bundled licensing, which we've never done. Well, I assume that "license of the binary" is designed in part to easily exclude autotools. You could have per-source-file accuracy but only for files that are "in" the binary, if you will. But then you have the overhead of figuring out what is "in" the binary. If you give up on per-source-file accuracy, this seems to imply the overhead of making a legal or quasi-legal (e.g. what I call 'folkloric') conclusion. Maybe instead of that we can come up with simple rules with the understanding that the (generally very simple) result is sometimes going to be fairly inaccurate. I don't know which of these options is better. There are probably various other ones. Richard _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-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/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
