On 04/07/2022 20:41, Brian Inglis wrote:
On 2022-07-04 10:30, Andrey Repin wrote:
Jon Turney wrote:
The following packages have been uploaded to the Cygwin distribution:
* cygport-0.35.2-1
cygport is the standard method for building and maintaining
packages for the Cygwin distribution.
Jon Turney (7):
Add LICENSE variable
I would suggest to print a note or warning if LICENSE is missing.
This may encourage maintainers to add it.
I second that emotion.
For those unconvinced, here's a friendly detailed explanation:
https://blog.codinghorror.com/pick-a-license-any-license/
Good article! Great quote from comments:
"Most developers will spend more time deciding on which license to use
and figuring out the difference between all of the licenses than they
will developing the app they want to license."
That is an orthogonal discussion: We already require that packages have
a definite license, and that it's an OSI approved one, so we know that
we can distribute it.
We just don't record that information in the package currently.
I would suggest not yet, as there is no other documentation that it
exists, what it should contain, or suggestions for use, and it would be
annoying to maintainers if it appeared every time the .cygport is parsed
during a build! It needs to be discussed some more on cygwin-apps.
Perhaps a reminder at scallywag build or cygport upload, once the
requirements have been documented?
Yes, the first step would be to warn at upload if license: is missing,
but we're not there yet.
I am proposing that the value of LICENSE should be a SPDX license
expression, and the documentation should now reflect that.
