#57: Seeking Council feedback/input on draft third party software policy
-------------------------+---------------------
Reporter: pfrields | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: workstation |
-------------------------+---------------------
Comment (by rhughes):
Replying to [comment:19 mattdm]:
The use of SPDX resources for license tags is an example; they mean
something different than Fedora does when we use "License: MIT".
Okay, this might be a concrete issue. The AppStream specification
explicitly specifies SPDX (and is shipped in AppStream and specified by
AppData files) as it's designed to be used by multiple distributions and
has already been adopted natively by both Debian and Suse. Being blunt,
although Fedora did a lot of "picking apart" of the license issues back in
the day, we can't base a freedesktop spec on the specific wording of how
Fedora Legal interprets specific parts of a license text. If SPDX and
Fedora disagree on the meaning of MIT we should probably fix that.
Upstream is now specifying the license as an SPDX string in the AppData
file, and we're showing that in preference to the license specified in the
spec file. If that needs to change then we're going to need pages like
https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0 specifically for Fedora license IDs, and
we're also going to need an explicit grammar for the License: line in the
spec file -- at the moment lots of packages are just specifying case-
incorrect text not designed for machine reading.
--
Ticket URL: <
https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/57#comment:21>
council <
https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets