El divendres, 30 de maig del 2025, a les 13:02:48 (Hora d’estiu d’Europa central), Neal Gompa va escriure: > On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > > El divendres, 30 de maig del 2025, a les 12:51:08 (Hora d’estiu d’Europa > > > > central), Neal Gompa va escriure: > > > On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 5:54 AM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > > > > We are trying to move most of the oss-fuzz related files to our reops > > > > instead of being in https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/ > > > > > > > > This will allow us to not have to depend on other people to merge > > > > changes > > > > in them which sometimes creates a bit of friction. > > > > > > > > The problem is that those files are licenses under Apache 2 which is > > > > not > > > > mentioned in https://community.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy > > > > > > > > I would like to propose that we add a point 18 to the policy that says > > > > > > > > 18. Files involved in the oss-fuzz tooling can be licensed under the > > > > Apache > > > > License 2.0 > > > > > > > > Comments? > > > > > > > > Please see > > > > https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/karchive/-/merge_requests/125/diffs > > > > for one of the various places we would use it. > > > > > > Why not maintain our own oss-fuzz repo where all this is contained? > > > The karchive MR seems to pollute the project with weird binary files > > > and such. I'd rather those not be in the repo. > > > > That's orthogonal to the "Accepting Apache 2" discussion, please let's > > focus on that. > > Honestly, it isn't. Because accepting that stuff at all is kind of the > reason for this. > I am fine with accepting Apache-2.0 content in a repo that's *all* > Apache-2.0 stuff. > From both the technical (this is goopy garbage)
Can you please not be so disrespectful with something that is in no way garbage? > and licensing > (Apache-2.0 with no exception sucks) perspective, I would only be okay > with it as its own repository. Sorry, but that is not going to happen, "tests" for code need to be with the code, not somewhere else. Can you please explain me what problem you have with a dozen of apt-get install/cmake/make lines being Apache-2.0? This is not going to pollute the rest of our code because no one is going to need to reuse that for anything else. Cheers, Albert
