Re: proposal for Fedora to start using SPDX identifiers


J Lovejoy
 

Hi Sebastian,

I knew/hoped there'd be some SPDX'ers who were also Fedora fans!

See comment below on where folks familiar with SPDX could be of most help:

On 8/4/21 4:00 PM, Sebastian wrote:
As some of you may remember, SPDX-legal undertook adding many licenses
on the Fedora Good list back in 2013-14 time frame. I have since
looked at the current Fedora Good list and updated a comparison doc,
see:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fi5SVzyCAL0UDravvkS6Us4lFwRiQy-l3qTUEkY92U0/edit#gid=243613621

For any of you who are here and Fedora enthusiasts, help with
researching some of the licenses and (eventually) updating existing
Fedora package license info once this all moves forward would be
greatly appreciated. It would also be good to think about ways to
collaborate into ways to automate any cross-functional processes going
forward so that we stay in sync.
Wow - that's an extensive spreadsheet you have there! I'll be able to
offer some information on the 'Teeworlds license' listed in the
spreadsheet at tomorrow's, shall we say, Legal 'Teem' meeting :)

For any of the licenses marked as "NO" (not on SPDX License List, but identified on the Fedora good list) - there is a need to:
1) see if the license is still used in Fedora - this can be done by a search for the Fedora identifier (if it's unique)
2) if so, then finding the actual text of the license in the source files and seeing if it happens to already be a match to something on SPDX License List
3) if not, submit to add

I have a notes column going to track any research as needed in the interim and am happy to add anyone with edit access who wants to help work on this. I think this is probably best done by folks who are pretty familiar with SPDX (the license list generally and matching guidelines)

Thanks,
Jilayne



Join Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org to automatically receive all group messages.