source RPMs at all. Someone suggested that if we ship pre-compiled
RPMs) we are not fulfilling the open source definition
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."
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
Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky(a)redhat.com>
Software Engineer - Developer Experience
Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com
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)?