Snap package licenses

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

That's an interesting idea.  Is there a known repository for license texts
which are not standard?  I see SPDX uses a LicenseRef-<ID> kind of
reference, but it's not clear what that is referencing. Just another field
inside the XML in the case of AppStream, I suppose?

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Neal Gompa <ngompa13 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mark Shuttleworth <mark at ubuntu.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > We should allow a plaintext field there for this situation. Yes, go
> > ahead with "Other open source".
> >
>
> It would probably make sense to support SPDX license tags and
> expressions[1]. This is used in AppStream, so a great amount of
> software is already classified in this manner. Furthermore, openSUSE
> uses SPDX tags for their license metadata for packages, and Debian
> uses a subset of it as part of the copyright file structure in Debian
> Source Control packaging.
>
> While we in Fedora use our own license tag list[2] that predates SPDX
> (used by a great deal of Linux distributions), we maintain a mapping
> to SPDX for AppStream support.
>
> Having verifiable license information (either Fedora style or SPDX
> style) is also useful for ensuring things are "compatible" or
> "desired" on a system, depending on whatever preference you may have.
>
> [1]: https://spdx.org/licenses/
> [2]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
>
> --
> Snapcraft mailing list
> Snapcraft at lists.snapcraft.io
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailm
> an/listinfo/snapcraft
>



-- 
gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/snapcraft/attachments/20170131/4d5a204e/attachment.html>