Dne 28. 08. 23 v 15:36 Richard Fontana napsal(a):
As for + being valid SPDX syntax, can that be supported by
fedora-license-validate or whatever the tool is called today?
That's probably a good idea, though it would seem to be predicated on
us documenting that any "allowed" license identifier is
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 8:30 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> What's the commended approach for packages that use deprecated
> identifiers then? I would rather not just convert "GPL-2.0" to
> "GPL-2.0-or-later" or "GPL-2.0-only", since it's almost always not
> obvious which one was originally intended
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 4:39 AM Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
>
> Top-posting a few comments related to this thread in total (instead of
> multiple responses to separate posts) and in hopes that people will be more
> likely to see/read :)
>
> As to Rust saying MPL-2.0+ is invalid - this is likely becau
Top-posting a few comments related to this thread in total (instead of
multiple responses to separate posts) and in hopes that people will be
more likely to see/read :)
As to Rust saying MPL-2.0+ is invalid - this is likely because Rust
thinks of the SPDX License List as *only* what is this pa
Dne 23. 08. 23 v 21:39 Richard Fontana napsal(a):
We are only treating the
*GPL family differently because of SPDX's (possibly unfortunate)
decision to do the same.
But technically
| GPL-2.0-or-later+
|
|is a valid SPDX string. Right?
|
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Manager, Packit and
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:08 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 22:55 Richard Fontana napsal(a):
> > The use of `+` is documented at
> > https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2-draft/SPDX-license-expressions/
> > (there's probably a more recent version)
> >
> >
> > D.3 Simple license expre
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 22:55 Richard Fontana napsal(a):
The use of `+` is documented at
https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2-draft/SPDX-license-expressions/
(there's probably a more recent version)
D.3 Simple license expressions
A simple is composed one of the following:
An SPDX License List Short
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 4:44 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:39 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 3:06 PM Fabio Valentini
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 1:21 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> >
> > > > rust-bitmaps warning: not valid ne
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:39 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 3:06 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 1:21 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> > > rust-bitmaps warning: not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX, please
> > > check
> >
> > This uses MPL-2.0
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 3:06 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 1:21 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> > rust-bitmaps warning: not valid neither as Callaway nor as SPDX, please
> > check
>
> This uses MPL-2.0 or later, denoted as "MPL-2.0+". It looks like an
> SPDX identifier, but i
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 7:21 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 1:08 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 9:11 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> New projection when we will be finished is 2025-01-11 (we are slowing down.
> Again. :( ). Pure linear approximation.
>
> It mi
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:28 PM Richard Fontana wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 9:08 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dne 22. 08. 23 v 13:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
> >
> > 2) rust-btrd:
> > License: GPL-2.0
> >
> > This is not on SPDX list, it should be either GPL-2.0-only or
> > GPL-2.0
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 9:08 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 13:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
>
> 2) rust-btrd:
> License: GPL-2.0
>
> This is not on SPDX list, it should be either GPL-2.0-only or GPL-2.0-or-later
>
>
> This is not on SPDX list *anymore*. It used to be valid identifier
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 9:05 PM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
(snip)
> Looks like there are 7 packages that I can fix later today:
>
> - rust-docopt
> - rust-procs
> - rust-rustcat
> - rust-tokei
> - rust-tree-sitter
> - rust-tree-sitter-cli
> - rust-varlink-cli
rust-docopt, rust-rustcat, rust-tokei
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 21:05 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
There's four packages that use "MPL-2.0+" which is not a valid SPDX identifier.
Not sure what to do about them, since I don't want to ignore upstream
license specification and change them to just "MPL-2.0".
I checked the sized-chunks
https://cr
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 1:21 PM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 1:08 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 9:11 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
(snip)
Thanks for running the checks! I looked at all the packages you listed.
> I run the statistics for rust-* only. And when
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 9:12 AM Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 15:07 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>
>
> Dne 22. 08. 23 v 13:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
>
> 2) rust-btrd:
> License: GPL-2.0
>
> This is not on SPDX list, it should be either GPL-2.0-only or GPL-2.0-or-later
>
>
> This is not on
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 15:07 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 13:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
|2) r||ust-btrd: License: ||GPL-2.0|
This is not on SPDX list, it should be either |GPL-2.0-only or
||GPL-2.0-or-later|
This is not on SPDX list *anymore*. It used to be valid identifier n
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 13:21 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
|2) r||ust-btrd: License: ||GPL-2.0|
This is not on SPDX list, it should be either |GPL-2.0-only or
||GPL-2.0-or-later|
This is not on SPDX list *anymore*. It used to be valid identifier not
long ago. I am afraid that this identifies is
Dne 22. 08. 23 v 1:08 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 9:11 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
New projection when we will be finished is 2025-01-11 (we are slowing down.
Again. :( ). Pure linear approximation.
It might not be as bad as you think!
All rust-* packages had been exclude
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 9:11 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>
> New projection when we will be finished is 2025-01-11 (we are slowing down.
> Again. :( ). Pure linear approximation.
It might not be as bad as you think!
All rust-* packages had been excluded from tracking since the start,
so the progre
tl;dr summary - we are slowing down again, huge progress with adding new
licenses
Two weeks ago we had:
* 22983 spec files in Fedora
* 29406license tags in all spec files
* 16915 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet
* 6242tags can be trivially converted using `license-fedora2spdx`
* Pr
22 matches
Mail list logo
