legal December 2024

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

2 participants
2 discussions

Fwd: SPDX Statistics - 224 packages remaining
by Miroslav Suchý 20 Dec '24

20 Dec '24

-------- Přeposlaná zpráva -------- Předmět: SPDX Statistics - 224 packages remaining Datum: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:36:53 +0100 Od: Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> Společnost: Red Hat Czech, s.r.o. Komu: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> Hot news: - All PRs for firmware packages are merged. - Small improvements to legal-doc has been done. If you want to dive into the changes see https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-legal-docs/-/merge_requests/?sort=cl… Two weeks ago we had: > * 24366spec files in Fedora > > * 31018license tags in all spec files > > * 268 tags are not SPDX compliant (number from line bellow minus packages with LicenseRef-Callaway-*) > > * 2542 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet > > * 29 tags can be trivially converted using `license-fedora2spdx` > > * Progress: 99.14% ░░░░░░░░░█100% > Today we have: * 24368spec files in Fedora * 31025license tags in all spec files * 224 tags are not SPDX compliant (number from line bellow minus packages with LicenseRef-Callaway-*) * 2475 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet * 21 tags can be trivially converted using `license-fedora2spdx` * Progress: 99.28% ░░░░░░░░░█100% ELN subset: 62 out of 2314 packages are not converted yet (progress 97.32%) Graph of these data with the burndown chart: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QVMEzXWML-6_Mrlln02axFAaRKCQ8zE807r… The list of packages needed to be converted is here: https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-f… List by package maintainers is here https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-f… Packages that are neither in SPDX nor in Callaway format (highest priority for now) - 55 packages: https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/neither-nor-remaining-p… Most of such packages has open issue in fedora-license-data. A lot of them are waiting for SPDX to approved the license and assign ID. I did NOT released new fedora-license-data as there were added a public domain dedication and an ultra permissive dedication. 11 licenses are waiting to be reviewed by SPDX.org (and then to be added to fedora-license-data) https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/?label_name%5B… If your package does not have neither git-log entry nor spec-changelog entry mentioning SPDX and you know your license tag matches SPDX formula, you can put your package on ignore list https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/ignore-packages.txt Either pull-request or direct email to me is fine. Miroslav

1 0

Usage of modified DUMB library with license patches
by Alexey Lunev 02 Dec '24

02 Dec '24

Hi everyone! I want to bring `zmusic` into Fedora, but there is some issues with licensing. ZMusic uses DUMB library, which has unusual DUMB-0.9.3 license[0], but it is basically zlib license with extra clauses which can restrict it to count as free and accepted license. Fedora already has `dumb ` package, it patches[1] license to make it equivalent to zlib, with permission from original authors[2]. It was 18 years ago. I cannot use this package, because DUMB library, which is bundled with ZMusic, is heavily modified[3]. Is it OK to do the same, or do i need to ask permission from authors again? [0]: https://github.com/kode54/dumb/blob/master/LICENSE [1]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dumb/blob/rawhide/f/dumb-0.9.3-license-c… [2]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dumb/blob/rawhide/f/license-clarificatio… [3]: https://github.com/ZDoom/ZMusic/blob/master/licenses/legal.txt#L15-L19

3 4

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal December 2024