On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 10:11:39PM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > As reaction to > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1 > > there were two similar feedbacks: > > * maintainer of package wants to use SPDX in both new and old branches > (including f36, epel7...) > > * Bodhi cannot recognize old short names in old branches and new SPDX > formulas in new branches. > > The thing with Bodhi is that once an update is created, then a message is > emitted and rpminspect checks the license (among other things) and adds a > good or bad stamp. It is only a warning for the maintainer and cannot stop > the update itself.
This last sentence is the key. If tools can't block use of SPDX tags in older branches, then maintainers are likely to end up doing so regardless of what package guidelines may say, whether by accident or intentionally through a common spec across branches. Thus I welcome the change to the proposal to explicitly accept what is likely to happen anyway. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
