[Fedora-packaging] License Tag Draft

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 7/27/07, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
>

>
> # For a breakdown of the licensing, see PACKAGE-LICENSING
>

Actual would it be possible that we cut down the syntax to the following:


License: see PACKAGE-LICENSING

PACKAGE-LICENSING: [Change format so that you can autoparse it better:
# Packager fill in the following. Package Reviewer check off.
Licenses for binaries:
GPLv3+

Licenses for documentation:
CC v3 OR GFDLv1.1

Licenses for source code:
GPLv3+

# Auto built licenses from rpmbuild-find-licenses.py
Known License Files Found:
GPLv2+     : /usr/share/pudding-pie-1.1.1/COPYING
Mozilla 1+  :/usr/share/pudding-pie-1.1.1/MOZILLA_STUFF

Unknown Licenses Found:
Apache 9  : Found mentioned in ./pudding-pie-1.1.1/zapper.cc
# License Headers Found:
./pudding-pie-1.1.1/foo.cc GPLv2+
./pudding-pie-1.1.1/main.cc Mozilla 1+
./pudding-pie-1.1.1/zapper.cc Apache 9
....

# No License Headers Found In:
./pudding-pie-1.1.1/foo.h
....

The tool could do a rough draft, and try to pull out any bad stuff
that might show up.. or at least help a reviewer think to themselves..
wtf Apache 9 License?

These could be fed upstream to help the authors better protect their
IP, avoid a license issue where their code ends up somewhere because
it didnt have a license header etc.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"