[Fedora-packaging] Proposal: Standardized License tags

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le mercredi 14 juin 2006 à 15:18 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen a écrit :

> Something like
> 
> GNU GPL version 2 or higher [see /usr/share/fedora-licenses/GPL_v2]
> GNU LGPL version 2 or higher [see /usr/share/fedora-license/LGPL_v2]
> GNU GPL version 2 ONLY [see /usr/share/fedora-licenses/GPL_v2]
> Mozilla Public License (MPL) version 2.0 [see
> /usr/share/fedora-licenses/MPL_2.0]

I think Mandriva packages common licenses in separate packages, and have
packages which use those licenses depend on those packages. But last
time this was brought on the table people felt this was dangerous
legally and each package should have its own license payload.

Now what hasn't been tried yet is to have this payload install in
standard places, which if my understanding of rpm is correct will work,
as long as each  GPL version 2 package (for example) uses the same file
with no indenting changes

And come to think of it, if rpm barfs because two files install the same
license text, but the md5sum of the license files differ, well there is
some risk one of the projects is not using the original license anymore,
but some "improved" (and probably no longer OSI-compliant) version.

However since some licensing templates put the author/project name in
the license text, all licenses may not fit in this scheme.

Gwaaaa, why do you put this on the table, head is hurting, need to go to
sleep ;)

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20060614/1f367077/attachment.bin