legal January 2014

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

16 participants
13 discussions

Clarification for Packaging:JavaScript#CompilationMinification
by Stanislav Ochotnicky 18 Jan '14

18 Jan '14

JavaScript Guidelines[1] about compilation/minification don't mention source RPMs at all. Someone suggested that if we ship pre-compiled javascript in a source rpm (even if we don't then ship it in binary RPMs) we are not fulfilling the open source definition[2] More specifically this part: "The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed." In essence: Is it enough to just remove minified/obfuscated js in %prep/%build to make sure we are not using pre-built version or do we have to remove it from the tarball so that we don't ship such compiled versions even in SRPMs? Above is especially important for GPL-licensed JS libraries, but even more permissive licenses could run afoul of Fedora "Freedom" foundation I guess. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:JavaScript#CompilationMinification [2] http://opensource.org/osd-annotated -- Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky(a)redhat.com> Software Engineer - Developer Experience PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com

2 1

Providing machine readable list of licenses
by Miro Hrončok 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

Hi, recently, I needed to check if the license short name used in Fedora packages is in good license or not. I've checked how rpmlint does that and what I saw horrified me. There is a hardcoded list of good licenses in rpmlint (old and not Fedora specific). Then there is a relatively up-to-date list of fedora good licenses in /etc/rpmlint/config. The comment says it's copied form the wiki at date XYZ. Is there a possibility to have a machine readable list of good software and content licenses somewhere in the package that can be Required by rpmlint and possibly others, and more important: have it also on the web (well up-to-dated), so if an app want's to query the latest list, it can (without parsing the wiki)? Thanks, -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok

1 0

Android Emoji font permissible in Fedora?
by Peter Oliver 06 Jan '14

06 Jan '14

I was considering packaging for Fedora the font Android Emoji, which is a Google font that provides pictographs in Android Jelly Bean. For a screenshot see, for example, http://phandroid.com/2012/08/30/tips-tricks-heres-a-quick-list-of-a-few-jel…. It happens that some of the glyphs depict the Android robot smiling, frowning, crying, etc.. I wondered whether this could pose any kind of trademark issue? The font uses the Apache License, Version 2.0, and is distributed with the Android source code, at https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base.git/+/jb-release/…. Thanks. -- Peter Oliver

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal January 2014