Hi all,
find below the list of topics that are planed to come up in the next EPEL SIG meeting which is scheduled for today, Wednesday at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.org.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/NextTestingStableMove -- unassigned; nirik? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Rhel51 -- knurd/nirik http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/RhelMetaData -- stahnma http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- yum-cron -- knurd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects Free discussion around EPEL
You want something to be discussed? Send a note to the list in reply to this mail and I'll add it to the schedule (I can't promise we will get to it tomorrow, but we'll most likely will if we don't run out of time). You can also propose topics at the end of the meeting itself.
*If your name/nick is on above list*: please give a status update on the list and in the wiki on the individual task pages (linked from the schedule page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Schedule ). That way all the interested parties know what up ahead of the meeting; that will avoid long delays and "status update monologues in the meeting.
Thanks!
CU knurd
On 10.10.2007 18:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- yum-cron -- knurd
Still not solved -- I try to reach the yum-cron maintainer right now to find a solution to the problem.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects
Seems this discussion died again. I'd say we leave it at that for a another week or two until F8 is finished.
CU knurd
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 10.10.2007 18:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects
Seems this discussion died again. I'd say we leave it at that for a another week or two until F8 is finished.
Is it because my name was in that thread ?
Because I think I see a pattern there :)
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:44:16 +0200 (CEST) dag@wieers.com (Dag Wieers) wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 10.10.2007 18:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects
Seems this discussion died again. I'd say we leave it at that for a another week or two until F8 is finished.
Is it because my name was in that thread ?
Because I think I see a pattern there :)
I think Thorsten was talking about the overall picture about spec files and licensing. The discussion of which seems to have spilled into the fedora board list and then died out with out much conclusion.
In regards to your clamav spec, I was hoping to work on that this week... make sure it matches the fedora guidelines and test upgrades from older clamav versions and/or the ancient ones in epel now.
I'd be happy to provide back any changes and let you look over the spec before I commit it.
kevin
On 10.10.2007 19:56, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:44:16 +0200 (CEST) dag@wieers.com (Dag Wieers) wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 10.10.2007 18:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects
Seems this discussion died again. I'd say we leave it at that for a another week or two until F8 is finished.
Is it because my name was in that thread ? Because I think I see a pattern there :)
I think Thorsten was talking about the overall picture about spec files and licensing.
Yes, of course -- otherwise the topic might have had "clamav" in it somewhere ;-)
Cu knurd
On 10.10.2007 19:44, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 10.10.2007 18:40, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to use spec files in other projects
Seems this discussion died again. I'd say we leave it at that for a another week or two until F8 is finished.
Is it because my name was in that thread ?
No, definitely not -- I actually made a bit noise about that particular topic months ago already somewhere before it came up again from your mail. But the people we need to finally get a definite say are busy with F8 atm and afaics.
But feel free to bring it up yourself on fedora-advisory-board right now -- the list is open to everyone and there is nothing else I would do in one or two weeks from now as well.
Further: I don't think the topic is that that critical -- as multiple people said, Fedora spec files are meant to be free to be used and modified by other parties. Some people even think that implicitly clarified already as Fedora as a whole gets distributed under the GPL (read that with a AFAICS, IANAL and "that's how I understood those people").
Even further: I would like to see it clarified, as I'm involved with other repos as well that sometimes use Fedora spec files.
CU knurd
P.S.:
Because I think I see a pattern there :)
Come on, we are all adults here. Such sort of comments don't help.
On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 20:06 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Even further: I would like to see it clarified, as I'm involved with other repos as well that sometimes use Fedora spec files.
As just reported to fedora-advisory-board in the minutes, here is the bit from last week's Board meeting:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-10-09#Spec_File_Licenses
Does that answer all open questions on the topic? Feel free to send this to other lists where this is an open topic, presuming it helps. :)
- Karsten
On 16.10.2007 21:16, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 20:06 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Even further: I would like to see it clarified, as I'm involved with other repos as well that sometimes use Fedora spec files.
As just reported to fedora-advisory-board in the minutes, here is the bit from last week's Board meeting: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-10-09#Spec_File_Licenses Does that answer all open questions on the topic? [...]
No. If I want to open a Fedora- oder EPEL-competitor-repo tomorrow I still can't be sure that nobody sues me when I take the Fedora spec files as base for it, as it's not written down under what terms precisely the spec files are available and reusable by other parties.
IOW: IANAL, but "Red Hat Legal says they should be as open and licensed just like everything else" and '# Choice of license is either "same as the package itself" or something extremely permissive like MIT/X11.' doesn't sound like somethign that's legally binding.
The Board needs to say and write down "all spec files that don't mention what they are licensed as are licensed under the MIT/X11 license." -- project contributers gave Red Hat / the Board the power to do something like that afaik.
CU knurd
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Dag Wieers -
Karsten Wade -
Kevin Fenzi -
Thorsten Leemhuis