On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 3:11:39 PM CDT Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> We see no reason why not to do that. It should not cause any harm. If
**you** know of any reason we should not propose
> this, please tell us now.
I already brought this up previously, but how will we handle license
identifiers such as MIT that are valid in both SPDX and Fedora but have
different meanings? We won't know whether it's specifically referring to the
MIT/Expat License (SPDX) or a group of MIT-like licenses (Fedora) and we won't
be able to tell which specfiles have been converted to use SPDX identifiers and
which haven't.
From the Change Proposal:
> * Convert license string to SPDX formula:
> $ license-fedora2spdx 'MIT or GPLv1'
>
> Warning: more options how to interpret MIT. Possible options:
> ['Adobe-Glyph', 'MIT-CMU', 'MIT-CMU', 'HPND', 'HPND', 'no-spdx-yet
> (MIT license (also X11))', 'SGI-B-2.0', 'SGI-B-2.0', 'SMLNJ',
> 'MIT-enna', 'MIT-feh', 'mpich2']
>
> mpich2 or GPL-1.0-only
--
Thanks,
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/Him/His