: [openstack-dev] Storing license information in
openstack/requirements
Should we store licensing information as a comment in the
*-requirements files ? Can it be stored on the same line ? Something
like:
oslo.messaging=1.3.0a4 # Apache-2.0
Since it's licenses we're tracking shouldn't we
David Koo wrote:
Should we store licensing information as a comment in the
*-requirements files ? Can it be stored on the same line ? Something
like:
oslo.messaging=1.3.0a4 # Apache-2.0
Since it's licenses we're tracking shouldn't we be tracking indirect
dependencies too (i.e. packages
Sean Dague wrote:
Honestly, if we are going to track this, we should probably do the set
of things that reviewers tend to do when running through these.
License:
Upstream Location:
Ubuntu/Debian Package: Y/N? (url)
Fedora Package: Y/N? (url)
Suse Package: Y/N? (url)
Last Release: Date
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Sean Dague wrote:
Honestly, if we are going to track this, we should probably do the set
of things that reviewers tend to do when running through these.
License:
Upstream Location:
Ubuntu/Debian Package: Y/N?
Hi everyone,
A year ago there was a discussion about doing a license inventory on
OpenStack dependencies, to check that they are compatible with our own
license and make sure any addition gets a proper license check.
Back then I proposed to leverage the openstack/requirements repository
to store
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.orgwrote:
Hi everyone,
A year ago there was a discussion about doing a license inventory on
OpenStack dependencies, to check that they are compatible with our own
license and make sure any addition gets a proper license
Honestly, if we are going to track this, we should probably do the set
of things that reviewers tend to do when running through these.
License:
Upstream Location:
Ubuntu/Debian Package: Y/N? (url)
Fedora Package: Y/N? (url)
Suse Package: Y/N? (url)
Last Release: Date (in case of abandonware)
+1 for yaml instead of shoving all kinds of package metadata in comments.
Sent from my really tiny device...
On Feb 17, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
Honestly, if we are going to track this, we should probably do the set
of things that reviewers tend to do when running
Should we store licensing information as a comment in the
*-requirements files ? Can it be stored on the same line ? Something
like:
oslo.messaging=1.3.0a4 # Apache-2.0
Since it's licenses we're tracking shouldn't we be tracking indirect
dependencies too (i.e. packages pulled in by
