Packaging CPAN modules for Fedora, the Oslo QA Hackathon, CPAN::Porters

[Gabor Szabo]

On 12 Mar 2008 14:08:36 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs at math.uh.edu> wrote:
> >>>>> "GS" == Gabor Szabo <szabgab at gmail.com> writes:
>
>  GS> So if you do find a module with problematic licenses it would be
>  GS> great if you could check if CPANTS http://cpants.perl.org/ has
>  GS> also caught that issue.
>
>  This is good news; Perl modules have often been a source of licensing
>  trouble due to missing or contradictory licenses.
>
>  Please also note that in Fedora, "problematic license" applies to the
>  plain Artistic license, so if a package licensed under the original
>  Artistic license (not the clarified or 2.0 versions) and does not also
>  have some other license (such as in the "Same as Perl" "GPL+ or
>  Artistic") then it is unfortunately not acceptable for Fedora.  For
>  example, Net-SinFP has 104.17% "Kwalitee" on the CPANTS site but is
>  not acceptable for Fedora because it carries only the Artistic
>  license.

Thanks.
Then I'll propose to Thomas and if accepted implement a
metric called "packagable_by_fedora" that will check several things:

The first thing it will include is a check on the license.
I am not sure though if it should check

    "license is not Artistic 1.0 alone"

It might be better to build a list of licenses acceptable by Fedora and check if
the module has one of those licenses. In this case the starting list would be:

  1) Perl (aka Artistic 1 + GPL)
  2) Artistic 2

What others would you include in that list?

Gabor