NOTE: Please publicize any license changes to your packages
skvidal at linux.duke.edu
Sun Jul 22 14:50:59 UTC 2007
On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 14:52 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 09:36:34 +0200
> Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 22:32 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > > On 7/20/07, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
> > > > So, the new FESCo is going to act as the "Fedora License Police"
> > >
> > > Always so negative.
> > Well, why should I change my opinion on something which had been
> > repeatedly discussed to death (E.g. on FPC meetings) and which I
> > consider to be "silly and naive"?
> > Seems to me as if any new FESCo is going to commit the same beginner's
> > mistakes others had been trapped into before.
> I'd like to point out this mandate came from the Board. FESCo did not
> start this on their own, they were told to do it.
A couple of more items on this decision:
1. we're not looking for things to be programming-api-perfect when it
comes to license specification in the License: tag.
2. We want to make it easier to do a global query to look for certain
ie: license X Requires a package which is license Y - these two are
incompatible and we need to deal with that.
Now, we're not expecting perfection, but it should be started.
More information about the devel