On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 12:47 AM Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 19. 06. 24 23:32, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 19. 06. 24 v 5:58 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > >> > >> How do you know the License tag is not supposed to be e.g. "GPL-2.0-only > >> AND > >> MIT" or similar? > >> > >> Converting "GPLv2" (which could mean any number of "weaker" licenses are > >> hidden under the "stronger" GPL in the old notation) to "GPL-2.0-only" > >> (which > >> means all the code is exactly GPL 2.0 only) cannot be done automatically. > >> > >> > > I don't know. But it seems like the best option. > > Not to me. > > When we decided to do the SPDX thing, we also decided to do the "no effective > license analysis" and "list all the licenses". I don't have an opinion whether > that decision is good or bad, but it is that way. We cannot automatically > convert GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only (or similarly with other variants and versions). > > If we do this, we are effectively saying "OK, we agreed on a set of rules, but > we decided to ignore them for a sake of..." what exactly? Completeness? > Closure? That does not make sense to me.
I agree. I thought the transition to SPDX identifiers *also* meant that packages *should* be reevaluated wrt/ their licenses. Doing an automatic conversion makes it *look* like that reevaluation was done when in fact it was not. Fabio -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
