Re: licensecheck split-off from devscripts-minimal

[Jared K. Smith]

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky  wrote:

>
> licensecheck is a glorified grep
> oslc (and https://pagure.io/muster) use proper algorithms and a
> "database" of full license texts and headers to provide much better
> matching accuracy.



The Fossology project (fossology.org) uses two different license scanners
that also do much more than a glorified grep -- check out
http://archive15.fossology.org/projects/fossology/wiki/Nomos and
http://archive15.fossology.org/projects/fossology/wiki/Monk for more
details.

I've found them to be much better than anything else I've seen in the open
source space.

--
Jared Smith
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: licensecheck split-off from devscripts-minimal

[Stanislav Ochotnicky]

On Tue 05 Jul 2016 09:12:19 AM CEST Sandro Mani  wrote:
> On 05.07.2016 03:30, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> Hey Sandro,
>>
>> What exactly does licensecheck do? and how is it different to the procject at
>> https://sourceforge.net/projects/oslc/  I ask because I would like to have us
>> implement something to check licensing when people upload tarballs to
>> lookaside cache and report when licenses change.
>>
>> Dennis
> Hi Dennis
> licensecheck simply scans files for license headers and prints out the
> detected license for each file (it is used by fedora-review for
> instance). I suppose the perl library introduced with the new
> licensecheck package offers some flexibility for third-party use. I
> don't know oslc, but it doesn't seem to be actively maintained?

Nah, I'd summarize it differently:

licensecheck is a glorified grep
oslc (and https://pagure.io/muster) use proper algorithms and a
"database" of full license texts and headers to provide much better
matching accuracy.

--
Stanislav Ochotnicky 
Business System Analyst, PnT DevOps - Brno

PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc.   http://cz.redhat.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: licensecheck split-off from devscripts-minimal

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Monday, July 4, 2016 6:02:52 PM CDT Sandro Mani wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Upstream has moved licensecheck to a new stand-alone package and removed
> it from devscripts-2.16.6 onwards.
> 
> I've packaged licensecheck, along with a dependency, review requests are
> here:
> 
> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352666 :
> perl-Pod-Constants - Include constants from POD
> - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352667 : licensecheck -
> Simple license checker for source files
> 
> I have a question about the upgrade path though:
> The current situation is:
> 
> devscripts-minimal:
> - licensecheck
> - checkbashism
> 
> The new situation would be:
> 
> devscripts-minimal:
> - checkbashisms
> 
> licensecheck:
> - licensecheck
> 
> Since devscripts-minimal will only contain checkbashisms, I'd plan to
> introduce a devscripts-checkbashisms package with that script, and keep
> devscripts-minimal (temporarily?) as a metapackage which requires
> devscripts-checkbashisms and licensecheck. So:
> 
> devscripts-minimal:
> Requires: devscripts-checkbashisms
> Requires: licensecheck
> 
> Does this make sense? I suppose I still need Obsoletes:
> devscripts-minimal < 2.16.6 in both licensecheck and
> devscripts-checkbashisms?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Sandro
> 

Hey Sandro,

What exactly does licensecheck do? and how is it different to the procject at 
https://sourceforge.net/projects/oslc/  I ask because I would like to have us 
implement something to check licensing when people upload tarballs to 
lookaside cache and report when licenses change. 

Dennis
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

licensecheck split-off from devscripts-minimal

[Sandro Mani]

Hi

Upstream has moved licensecheck to a new stand-alone package and removed 
it from devscripts-2.16.6 onwards.


I've packaged licensecheck, along with a dependency, review requests are 
here:


- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352666 : 
perl-Pod-Constants - Include constants from POD
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352667 : licensecheck - 
Simple license checker for source files


I have a question about the upgrade path though:
The current situation is:

devscripts-minimal:
- licensecheck
- checkbashism

The new situation would be:

devscripts-minimal:
- checkbashisms

licensecheck:
- licensecheck

Since devscripts-minimal will only contain checkbashisms, I'd plan to 
introduce a devscripts-checkbashisms package with that script, and keep 
devscripts-minimal (temporarily?) as a metapackage which requires 
devscripts-checkbashisms and licensecheck. So:


devscripts-minimal:
Requires: devscripts-checkbashisms
Requires: licensecheck

Does this make sense? I suppose I still need Obsoletes: 
devscripts-minimal < 2.16.6 in both licensecheck and 
devscripts-checkbashisms?


Thanks

Sandro


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org