[Fedora-packaging] Re: License Tag Draft

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Fri Jul 27 14:56:13 UTC 2007

On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 10:14:48AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:08:21 -0500
> Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:
> > Seems to me, that at least in part, Ralf disagrees with the assertion 
> > that a problem exists that is worth all this pain of solving.

I also still try to understand where the need for this change comes
from, see my other mail in this thread.

> You mean the problem of mixing thousands of packages together of
> varying licenses which may or may not be incompatible?  I don't see
> how you can possibly think this problem doesn't exist.

But didn't we had to deal with this problem on a per package basis
until now and will have to do so no matter what overly complex parsing
system will be installed?

Take for example madwifi, a "GPL2v += || BSDwhatever" licensed
software that should be compatible according to the parser with the
"GPL2v || syscalls exceptions" kernel ...

So you'll creating a mesh where elefants can slip through, and at the
end we'll only have added bureaucracy for the packagers with no added
value whatsoever - packages will have to be checked against their
build and runtime depdencies carefully llllike they had to until now.

You can't replace a legal review with a parser ...
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070727/5f78d837/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list