2016-07-24 1:53 GMT+02:00 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu>:
Haïkel <hguemar(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
> 3. execute the change (packagers + provenpackagers),
Honestly I feel this should instead be:
3. execute the change (people who want this)
That's likely a misunderstanding (I'm not a native speaker), packagers
will be encouraged to do it, but not *forced* to do it themselves.
Ultimately it will be left to the change owners to do it and it's not
feasible without a set of volunteering provenpackagers as it's a
I also volunteered to do it in the initial mail.
Figuring out the proper tag could potentially involve a re-review of
licensing of a large number of packages, to account for the situations
where there isn't simply a 1-to-1 mapping between our current tags and
this new setup.
Considering version 2.0, this is likely to be a short list and
wouldn't be better to fix it in that standardization body. And we're
already using SPDX in gnome software.
There just isn't enough obvious benefit (to me, anyway, though I
doubt I'm alone) to push this change through without a set of people
already lined up to do the work.
> As we have already standardized our licensing nomenclature, it
> easily automatable (update git but not necessarily with rebuild).
If it's that easy, the script to convert everything should also be
provided by those who want this change. Or at least a really simple set
of instructions between what we now have and what you would want us to
have. I'd expect to see that document pretty much up front, before
anyone else sinks time into this.
This discussion lost some context, but I offered to write that tooling
last year (which was to me a prerequisite for submitting a change)
At this stage, without Fedora Legal green light, it's useless to
request FPC input and submitting a Fedora system-wide change with
proper documentation and tooling.
Also, this gets us away from the current process of "ask
you see some new license" to... something else, since we no longer
control the tags. Someone needs to document the "something else", and
preferably set up some Fedora contact who will handle whatever
interaction is needed with whatever standards group is involved.
that only changes the nomenclature, not that process.
I don't know all the details, but Spot is listed among the
contributors, we're maybe already involved even indirectly to that
But yes, we need a representative from Fedora Legal but that's likely
part of the decision.