Closed pkking closed 1 year ago
I am afraid Freely Distributable is not a free software license. I wonder why cherrypy lists that instead of just listing the actual BSD license.
I see two license in the setup.py
:
'License :: Freely Distributable',
'Operating System :: OS Independent',
'Framework :: CherryPy',
'License :: OSI Approved :: BSD License',
Should it be acceptable?
@pkking, the question of licensing is rather an unpleasant one. If an upstream project defines more classifiers, one which is free (BSD), and one that isn't (Freely Distributable) we can't just choose one of them and declare that the project is "good for Fedora".
In this case, cherrypy should stop using the 'License :: Freely Distributable'
classifier.
What you can do about it?
'License :: Freely Distributable'
- the best option, will stop causing problems in the future for the otherscustom
build method. As a script invoke pyp2spec cherrypy --top-level --license BSD-3-Clause
and define pyp2spec
as a build dependency. This will skip the license compliance phase and set the value you chose. Be mindful that Copr only allows to build packages with free licenses, same as Fedora (https://docs.pagure.org/copr.copr/user_documentation.html#what-i-can-build-in-copr)There's another bad news. Fedora is migrating to SPDX standard which is more strict, and it's impossible to tell automatically whether BSD License
is BSD-2-Clause or BSD-3-Clause. Soon this will start creating problems too. I really hope that Python projects switch to the standard too, so that we don't have to translate the classifiers anymore. But that's just future... In the meantime, the tips from the previous answer are still valid.
Will try to ping the upstream, thanks.
When im building a pypi package in copr, i met this:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lcrpkking/waaagh/srpm-builds/05088358/builder-live.log.gz
Im not sure the
Freely Distributable
is forbidden by fedora or its just a misjudge