NOTE: Please publicize any license changes to your packages
rc040203 at freenet.de
Tue Jul 24 16:14:23 UTC 2007
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 07:59 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 09:10 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 07:33 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> > > Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> > >
> > > >> sort of automatic file checking would help flag problems.
> > > > In trivial cases such as the GPLv3 change, it could help.
> > > >
> > > > In cases of packages changing from FOO-license v1.283 to BAR-license
> > > > v32.100 it doesn't.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it notice the deletion of the FOO-license file at least though
> > > and flag it up?
> > If there is any, may-be - If there isn't any, no.
> > Also consider: Detached license files are legally questionable/doubtful.
> > What matters is the license inlined or referenced by each files. Non
> > copyright owner added licenses are even more questionable.
> > > At least then someone
> > someone == Jef Spaleta or other people from the Board
> > > > In cases of packages pointing to web-sites, it
> > >
> > > Yes I guess so, although it could wget the URL periodically and hash
> > > that (assuming there are no "today's date" and crud on the page)
> > Feel free to do so ... Feel free to do so if these URLs change or vanish ;)
> > > >> Granted its
> > > >> not going to work for all packages, but it might help a lot in the
> > > >> specific case of entire project codebases transitioning to gpl3 from a
> > > >> previous license.
> > > > If you think so, I disagree. You are driving away contributors from
> > > > fedora, by imposing more and more bureaucracy. If you really want this
> > >
> > > The automated technique is a small burden if it works for most packages.
> > We already _have_ way too much bureaucracy in Fedora.
> > > Since care is taken about the license to get it into Fedora it is
> > > consistent to take some care about the license after it is in... and
> > > with fun things like "or later" now...
> > Feel free to do so - Without me. Shall the "Board" (Whatever
> > board-de-jour we might be talking about) and the dark forces surrounding
> > it inside of RH do so - Without me - Period.
> dark forces?
The person @RH or the person from whatever "committee-de-jour", who is
pushing this nonsense onto users and devs. - Give names, please.
More information about the devel