Dne 18. 06. 24 v 6:46 odp. Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
I am going to do the mass change of the license from GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only
Done.
The diff is here https://k00.fr/c1vnf850
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
--
Dne 01. 07. 24 v 19:45 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
Dne 01. 07. 24 v 4:58 odp. Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
If the decision was made to proceed with the `LicenseRef-` prefix, I
assume you would keep sending us some statistics, how many old
identifiers remains, right?
My original plan was to close th
Dne 01. 07. 24 v 4:58 odp. Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
If the decision was made to proceed with the `LicenseRef-` prefix, I assume you would keep sending us some statistics,
how many old identifiers remains, right?
My original plan was to close this with deadline for F41 Changes and focus on someth
If the decision was made to proceed with the `LicenseRef-` prefix, I
assume you would keep sending us some statistics, how many old
identifiers remains, right?
Vít
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 18:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
Unfortunatelly I do not see a clear consensus here. I think that
exactly for s
On 6/26/24 5:24 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Miroslav Suchý:
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could you make the comment something like this?
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
# TODO check if there are other licenses to be listed
License: GPL-2.0-onl
On 6/26/24 8:41 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:24 AM Jerry James wrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 6:17 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
We will get valid SPDX formula.
Some legacy license names contain spaces. Simply slapping
"LicenseRef-Fedora-" on the front will only affect
Unfortunatelly I do not see a clear consensus here. I think that exactly for
such cases we have good instution: FESCO.
I filed https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3230 and I will follow FESCO decision.
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and CPT, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
--
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:24 AM Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 6:17 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > We will get valid SPDX formula.
>
> Some legacy license names contain spaces. Simply slapping
> "LicenseRef-Fedora-" on the front will only affect the first word of
> such multiword
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 16:28 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 11:47 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok
wrote:
On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 11:47 Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok
wrote:
On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could you make the comment something like this?
#
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 6:17 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> We will get valid SPDX formula.
Some legacy license names contain spaces. Simply slapping
"LicenseRef-Fedora-" on the front will only affect the first word of
such multiword license names, resulting in an invalid SPDX formula.
We would also
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 02:32:34PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 26. 06. 24 14:17, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Dne 26. 06. 24 v 11:47 dop. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> > >
> > > Clearly, I must miss something. What do we gain by causing all
> > > license tags to conform to the SPDX license expression
On 26. 06. 24 14:17, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 11:47 dop. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Clearly, I must miss something. What do we gain by causing all license tags
to conform to the SPDX license expression standard despite actually just
using the old tag with extra boilerplate?
We wi
Dne 26. 06. 24 v 11:47 dop. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Clearly, I must miss something. What do we gain by causing all license tags to conform to the SPDX license expression
standard despite actually just using the old tag with extra boilerplate?
We will get valid SPDX formula. And all tools gene
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 at 05:48, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >>> Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
>
> Could you make the c
* Miroslav Suchý:
> Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
>>
>> Could you make the comment something like this?
>>
>> # Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
>> # TODO check if there are other licenses to be listed
>> License: GPL-2.0-only
>
> We (the Change owners) di
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:22:15AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:47:55AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:47:55AM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > >
> > > On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > > > Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> > > > >
> > > > >
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 11:48 Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >>> Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
>
> Could you make the co
On 26. 06. 24 5:59, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could you make the comment something like this?
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:20 PM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
> >>
> >> Could you make the comment something like this?
> >>
> >> # Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
> >> # TODO check if th
26. kesäkuuta 2024 2.20.19 GMT+03:00 "Miro Hrončok"
kirjoitti:
>On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Could you make the comment something like this?
>>>
>>> # Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
>>> # TODO chec
On 25. 06. 24 22:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could you make the comment something like this?
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
# TODO check if there are other licenses to be listed
License: GPL-2.0-only
We (the Change own
Dne 25. 06. 24 v 1:09 odp. Miro Hrončok napsal(a):
Could you make the comment something like this?
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
# TODO check if there are other licenses to be listed
License: GPL-2.0-only
We (the Change owners) discussed this on a meeting today. And
On 21. 06. 24 8:30, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
What I can do is to put a comment above the license:
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
License: GPL-2.0-only
Could you make the comment something like this?
# Automatically converted from old format: GPLv2
# TODO check if there
Dne 21. 06. 24 v 11:55 dop. Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
+1 for continuing the (imperfect) convertion to SPDX.
Note that current phase is the last one. Before "Change Checkpoint: 100% Code Complete Deadline" (that is 2024-08-20) I
plan to file Bugzillas for all remaining non-converte
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:24:44AM -0600, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
> On 6/19/24 6:07 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> > Relatedly, I have had some misgivings and mixed feelings about these
> > mass conversions, because I have worried that the resulting situation
> > will make people complacent regarding
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 12:47 AM Miro Hrončok 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"
On 6/19/24 6:07 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 11:58 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 18. 06. 24 18:46, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Hi.
I am going to do the mass change of the license from GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only
Hi.
How do you know the License tag is not supposed to be e.g. "GPL-2.0
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 11:58 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 18. 06. 24 18:46, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > I am going to do the mass change of the license from GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only
>
> Hi.
>
> How do you know the License tag is not supposed to be e.g. "GPL-2.0-only AND
> MIT" or similar?
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" GP
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" (whi
On 18. 06. 24 18:46, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Hi.
I am going to do the mass change of the license from GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only
Hi.
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 a
Hi.
I am going to do the mass change of the license from GPLv2 to GPL-2.0-only
The proposed diff is here https://k00.fr/c1vnf850
Affected packages:
acpica-tools
adanaxisgpl
alevt
aoetools
apcupsd
appliance-tools
arachne-pnr
artwiz-aleczapka-fonts
aspell-fi
aspell-la
asterisk
asunder
authbind
b
34 matches
Mail list logo
