Re: SPDX: Consistency of tools

On 04. 04. 23 7:44, Miroslav Suchý wrote: AFAIK both tool has been already migrated and will complain when you use short format. At least rpmlint will not complain for old license identifiers. rpmlint-fedora-license-data contains both - /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml and - /etc/

Re: SPDX: Consistency of tools

On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 12:45 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 04. 04. 23 v 3:20 Richard Shaw napsal(a): > > I have updated my licensecount script which summarises the licenses in a > source and uses licensecheck to output SPDX licenses instead, but they > output the "short" form as far as I can tel

Re: SPDX: Consistency of tools

V Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 08:20:07PM -0500, Richard Shaw napsal(a): > While no matter what we do, there are maintainers that are not going to > proactively update their packages, until we unify the tools and > documentation to "do the right thing", we're pissing in the wind. > What surprised me is th

Re: SPDX: Consistency of tools

On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 1:45 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 04. 04. 23 v 3:20 Richard Shaw napsal(a): > > WARNING: This is a small rant... > > np :) > > I decided to look up my packages on src.fedoraproject.org (I'm still not sure > if it's showing me all packages I'm admin of, or just main admi

Re: SPDX: Consistency of tools

Dne 04. 04. 23 v 3:20 Richard Shaw napsal(a): WARNING: This is a small rant... np :) I decided to look up my packages on src.fedoraproject.org (I'm still not sure if it's showing me all packages I'm admin of, or just main admin) and start working through them one

SPDX: Consistency of tools

WARNING: This is a small rant... I have tried to keep up with the emails on the devel list around this but I admit that I haven't been able to devote the time to GROK them all. I decided to look up my packages on src.fedoraproject.org (I'm still not sure if it's showing me all packages I'm admin