Henry Spencer's license
by Petr Šabata
While checking the contents of our `perl' package, I noticed the following:
/* NOTE: this is derived from Henry Spencer's regexp code, and should not
* confused with the original package (see point 3 below). Thanks, Henry!
/* Additional note: this code is very heavily munged from Henry's version
* in places. In some spots I've traded clarity for efficiency, so don't
* blame Henry for some of the lack of readability.
/* The names of the functions have been changed from regcomp and
* regexec to pregcomp and pregexec in order to avoid conflicts
* with the POSIX routines of the same names.
* pregcomp and pregexec -- regsub and regerror are not used in perl
* Copyright (c) 1986 by University of Toronto.
* Written by Henry Spencer. Not derived from licensed software.
* Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any
* purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely,
* subject to the following restrictions:
* 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of
* this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise
* from defects in it.
* 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either
* by explicit claim or by omission.
* 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
* be misrepresented as being the original software.
**** Alterations to Henry's code are...
**** Copyright (C) 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,
**** 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
**** by Larry Wall and others
**** You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
**** License or the Artistic License, as specified in the README file.
You can see the whole file here:
I looked but couldn't find any common name for this license
of Henry's. Is it on our list? Is it free? What name should
I use in the License tag?
2 weeks, 2 days
Where are the OFL* licenses?
by Jerry James
I just ran rpmlint over a package under the OFL-1.1-RFN license, with
the rpmlint-fedora-license-data package installed. I got "W:
invalid-license OFL-1.1-RFN". I undertook a search on the allowed 
and not allowed  license pages. Only "OFL-1.1" appears anywhere,
under the "All licenses" section of . (And, faithfully reproducing
this, "OFL-1.1" is the only OFL* license that appears in the
The underlying license data  from which  and  are generated
lists all of OFL-1.0, OFL-1.0-RFN, OFL-1.0-no-RFN, OFL-1.1,
OFL-1.1-RFN, and OFL-1.1-no-RFN. Why aren't the other licenses
showing up on  and in rpmlint-fedora-license-data? Is it because
"OFL-1.1" is the only one of the six that has a "Y" in both the "OSI?"
and "FSFLibre?" columns of licenses.md? If so, what does that imply
about the status of the other 5 licenses for Fedora?
License correction for libIDL-doc
by Ben Beasley
While converting libIDL to SPDX (LGPLv2+ → LGPL-2.0-or-later), I noticed
that the documentation is actually GPLv3+. The libIDL-doc subpackage’s
License field is therefore corrected from LGPLv2+ to GPL-3.0-or-later.
– Ben Beasley (FAS music)
by Miroslav Suchý
I was curious how many packages are already converted to SPDX.
I downloaded all spec files and count how many of them contains "spdx" string (case insensitive). Assuming most
packagers mention it either in changelog or in comment near License field.
The string is in 347 out of 23155 spec files. That is less than 2% of packages.
It is wild guess with many incorrect of assumtions, but I guess the order of magnitude is correct.
That is just FYI. I will not do anything to progress faster, because `fedora-license-data` has enough issues (and mainly
flow of new issues).
5 months, 1 week