[Fedora-legal-list] Re: SPDX license tags and Rust packaging
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Haïkel <hguemar(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
2017-02-23 15:31 GMT+01:00 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com>:
> Hello all,
>
> I know that it's been discussed from time to time about using SPDX
> identifiers for our license tags[1][2]. In the Rust SIG, we're
> beginning the work to figure out the packaging of Rust things. Cargo,
> the Rust equivalent of Python's pip, enforces the usage of SPDX
> identifiers for license tags in the Cargo.toml (the file indicating
> the metadata of a "crate").
>
> If we're considering using SPDX identifiers for license tags (as it
> appeared to be the case in Tom's FOSDEM talk[3]), would it be possible
> to grant us the ability to just use that data instead of having to
> attempt to maintain a mapping of SPDX to Fedora short tags? Since our
> ecosystem in Fedora is basically zero right now, we could avoid the
> ugliness right from the get-go.
>
This is just my opinion.
1. I do not see any justification to grant a specific exception *only*
to the Rust SIG
I actually would like us to just allow it voluntarily all over, and
that Rust SIG would just happen to be the first to do it. I think
that's probably better than just an exception for Rust SIG. :)
2. The mapping is quite straightforward for most cases (Cf. the
discussion on fedora-legal),
so technically it's not uglier than what other languages packaging utilities do.
I'm aware of the logical mapping, but I don't know of any
implementations that attempt to go SPDX->Fedora automatically. I think
it'd just be cumbersome, especially as SPDX identifiers grow as the
license list is revised over time. I'd much rather skip all that and
just start using them directly...
I still think that we should move to SPDX but maintaining
consistency
within the distro is also important.
I don't disagree, but we need to start somewhere...
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!