On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 10:07 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 3:53 PM Jilayne Lovejoy <jlovejoy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I'm also wondering where the "required to document source licensing for > > bundled stuff" is documented? Can you point to that? > > > > It was something we were told to do years ago for Rust/Go stuff. I'm > not sure I can find a specific reference for it. I have mentioned it > before though[1]. > > [1]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/POAC4FDCIPU3W24DGY2LCDTDC7WYBNPN/ Side note: We actually worked around the problem you're discussing with Rust packaging. - source package name: rust-%{crate} - built packages (containing source code): rust-%{crate}-devel etc. - built packages (containing binaries): %{crate} (usually) - there is no built package with the name rust-%{crate} So while the main "License" tag from the rust-%{crate} source package (which can be generated from upstream's SPDX metadata) is automatically inherited by all subpackages, the subpackage that actually contains the binaries can have a different "License" tag (i.e. one that takes all statically linked content into account), because its name is different than the name of the source package. Fabio _______________________________________________ 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
