Il 07/09/2024 22:56, Aurélien COUDERC ha scritto:
Hi Fabio, Le samedi 7 septembre 2024, 21:43:35 CEST Fabio Fantoni a écrit :So I wonder, is it possible to put in d/copyright DEP5 the short license names using the spdx ones?we’ve been doing that for KDE packages since upstream started tagging all source files with SPDX-License / SPDX-Copyright headers and so using SPDX license identifiers some years ago. See [1] for example. While not strictly adhering to DEP-5 I consider it useful to have a machine-readable-with-SPDX-identifiers and I’m not sure how useful it is to try and translate upstream-provided SPDX identifiers into something else. Our spec [2] already defines an equivalence rule between License-X and License-X.0 declarations for SPDX compatibility. For what I’ve seen on the quite vast and diverse KDE source corpus we’d only need 2 additional equivalence rules to be added to matches what that upstream ships : - equivalence between the + and -or-later suffixes (GPL-2+ / GPL-2.0-or-later) - equivalence between MIT and Expat. [1] https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/kde/plasma-workspace/-/blob/debian/experimental/debian/copyright [2] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-short-name
Thanks for the information, about tools that help to create and check d/copyright are you experiencing problems?
I use a lot decopyand I found that there is this MR of 1 year ago not merged: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/decopy/-/merge_requests/4
it would be useful even if it didn't have spdx generation by default but at least as an option, I was wondering if there was something preventing the use of the spdx name but from the current responses it does not appear.
one more question, is there any tool/script to convert current d/copyright to spdx names?
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature