[Fedora-packaging] License Tag Draft

Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com
Fri Jul 27 13:02:46 UTC 2007

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:24:52 +0200
Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:

> OK, then this plan all grow on your own soil?
> Then this isn't much more but a: "I, Spot, want my pony"?
> > The immediate motivation was concern over GPLv3 and LGPLv3
> > compatibility, as packagers were innocently violating licensing due
> > to a lack of awareness, and there was no mechanism in place to
> > automate basic package license checking due to a lack of
> > standardization.
> > 
> > However, as Smooge pointed out, this is something that a lot of
> > people have known needed to be done since FC2 (and likely,
> > before).  
> Well, this isn't the first time this issue pops up. We even discussed
> and rejected a similar proposal on FPC before. Just reiterating and
> re-proposing something doesn't make a plan/proposal more useful.

Please lower your tinfoil hat a bit so you can hear this.

The duly elected Fedora Board has decided that due to things like
(l)gplv3 it is now painfully apparent that we need a better method of
tracking what licenses our various packages are under, and has asked
FESCo to make it happen.  FESCo has deemed this a Packaging issue and
given FPC the mandate to make proposals for how to accomplish this.
Spot has volunteered as part of the FPC to create such a proposal for
how to handle this for FPC/FESCo/Board approval, and that's where we
are.  If Spot didn't volunteer, who would?  Would you then claim that
whomever created the draft is now trying to be dictator?  If the idea
doesn't come from you does it automatically mean it's coming from a
shadowy smoke filled room somewhere within the bowels of Red Hat?

Yes, the FPC rejected one proposal.  That was before the Fedora Board
voted and deemed it necessary to track this, and that's why we're
talking about it again.  We don't have the authority to veto the Board
in their mandate.

Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070727/cc4e84df/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list