On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 11:44 AM Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net wrote:
In python-ezdxf 0.18, a few new Python modules are included that are derived from other software. The License is therefore no longer simply “MIT.” Of the new modules in question, one is a fork of its original upstream. I have treated it as a bundled dependency, adding the appropriate virtual Provides. The others are full rewrites from different languages; the licenses of the original projects still affect the ezdxf License, but I have not treated them as bundled dependencies since no code is copied from the original projects. See the comments in the spec file above the License field if the details matter to you.
In classic “Calloway” notation, the new License field would become:
MIT and (ISC and MIT) and (AGPLv3 and MIT)However, I am taking the opportunity to convert the package to SPDX, and so the License will become:
(MIT AND (ISC AND MIT) AND (AGPL-3.0-only AND MIT))
Under our new License: field guidelines, a simple license expression (just a license identifier, basically) wouldn't get repeated in a conjunctive composite expression, even if it applies to multiple separable components, and there ordinarily would be no reason to wrap AND subexpressions in parentheses. I haven't looked at this package but it might be that the License: field should be:
MIT AND ISC AND AGPL-3.0-only
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/#_conjunctive_and_l...
Richard