Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

barbie (2653)

barbie
  reversethis-{ku. ... m} {ta} {eibrab}
http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk/

Leader of Birmingham.pm [pm.org] and a CPAN author [cpan.org]. Co-organised YAPC::Europe in 2006 and the 2009 QA Hackathon, responsible for the YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org] and the QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org] websites. Also the current caretaker for the CPAN Testers websites and data stores.

If you really want to find out more, buy me a Guinness ;)

Links:
Memoirs of a Roadie [missbarbell.co.uk]
[pm.org]
CPAN Testers Reports [cpantesters.org]
YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org]
QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org]

Journal of barbie (2653)

Wednesday June 06, 2007
07:08 AM

The Battle of The RPMS - License vs Copyright

[ #33444 ]

It's been several years since I had to build an RPM. Today I had to build one for work, and instantly hit an odd error. It basically claimed that 'Copyright:' wasn't supported and bombed with a synatx error. A bit of googling and I discovered that as of rpmbuild-4.4 the tag 'Copyright' was replaced with 'License'.

Now maybe it's just me, but License and Copyright are two entirely different things. One doesn't imply the other. While both can exist separately, stating that one has been superceded by the other is just nuts. I can understand why License should be included, as knowing the distribution rights can be quite important. But to ban the use of Copyright just seems to be a nuisance. If they had downgraded it's usage to that of a comment, then that I could understand. But to state, as one poster did, that "it's a bug in your packaging" is just inconvient and annoying.

In this case the rpm I'm building is for internal use only, so setting License to 'Restricted Private' doesn't seem to be as informative as 'Copyright: 1998-2007 MessageLabs'.

License vs Copyright ... the new holy wars!

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.