[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

SPDX, unbranding? (Re: DEP-5 meta: New co-driver; current issues)

Le Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:43:36PM +1200, Lars Wirzenius a écrit :
> The SPDX people are collaboration with other projects, including Fedora,
> on this right now. Steve and I discussed it and he'll join the SPDX
> mailing list to represent us, and will relay any concerns and updates.
> (I don't know if the SPDX list is public. I hope it is. If someone can
> find out and post a URL to their list archive, it would be a good
> thing.)


I looked at SPDX today (I should have done earlier), and wondered how DEP-5
would be useful in that context.  One of the reasons I was in favor of
unbranding the DEP was to propose to upstream developers to use it, so that we
can forward the fruit of our efforts and make them useful outside the Debian
world. SPDX will change the situation a lot, and it may be less benefical to
forward a DEP-5 file than a SPDX file.

> > Unbranding
> > ----------
> > 
> > To my knowledge, you were the first to suggest this. 
> I can't remember what this is about. Can you refresh our memories?

You are right, and my memory was wrong. I am terribly sorry. I checked my
mailboxes, and a private thread, it is me who raised the question of
unbranding. I am not sure however if it is my original idea, or if I picked it
somewhere else earlier.

If SPDX takes off, there is not much point unbranding DEP-5 anymore. Especially
if, as Russ suggests, the DEP it is integrated in the Debian Policy.


Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

Reply to: