[Fedora-packaging] License Tag Draft
mclasen at redhat.com
Thu Jul 26 23:25:58 UTC 2007
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 19:23 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 19:19 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:17:30 -0600
> > "Stephen John Smoogen" <smooge at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I find the reading of && || to be a little hard. Wouldnt it be better
> > > to use the or as in the Perl license way? or was there a legal reason
> > > for not to.. beyond that I think the two are good.Parenthesis I do not
> > > have a problem with.
> > Machine parsing? '||' and '&&' is easier to catch/parse than 'or' and
> > 'and' perhaps? Just guessing.
> This is precisely why.
Looks entirely over the top to me. Can we make packaging any harder ?
I'm all for somewhat accurate license tags, but if the goal is to make
spec files machine parsable, then why not go to xml straight away ?
And what is the purpose of commenting licenses in the file list, apart
from making the packagers life miserable ?
More information about the Fedora-packaging