Re: proposal for Fedora to start using SPDX identifiers

Jonas Smedegaard

Quoting J Lovejoy (2021-08-05 05:52:13)
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:

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
Since I assume it is not only relevant if those licenses identified by
Fedora exists "in the wild" only _distributed_ by Fedora, I can suggest
to also make use of

- Jonas

* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website:

[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.