LICENSE (was Re: [ITP] asr-manpages, funny-manpages)

[Jon Turney]

On 14/05/2022 14:15, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 08/05/2022 18:49, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2022-05-08 09:15, Libor Ukropec wrote:
>>> Dne 07.05.2022 v 20:52 Brian Inglis napsal(a):
>>>> I would like to offer to package the following projects for Cygwin.
>>>> They have been extensively tested on my own system for decades. ;^>
>>>> They are offered on the major distros listed below, and the cygport 
>>>> builds are available in my Google Drive folders.
>>
>>> I haven't known them until now. Quite fun :)
>>> Built and installed without any issue.
>>>
>>> If I can give the GTG, here it is..
>>
>> Thanks - now I just need another four or so.
>>
>>> BTW, I noted LICENSE, CYGWIN_MAINTAINER, UPSTREAM_MAINTAINER 
>>> variables ... are they used/shown somewhere and is it a best practise 
>>> to have them in the cygport script?
>>
>> Something I think should be documented somewhere, are tracked in some 
>> other distros package trackers, easier to add on adoption, and useful 
>> when you want to submit bug reports upstream.
>> Defining then as shell vars mean you can use them for searching or in 
>> commands.
> 
> 'LICENSE' probably should be required by cygport, containing a SPDX ID 
> or license expression.
> 
> I'm not sure about 'CYGWIN_MAINTAINER', since we already track that 
> information elsewhere.

Brian,

I am tinkering with adding support for LICENSE in cygport-> license: in 
src.hint, exposing that in the package summary data, backfilling from 
existing cyports and validating those as SPDX license expressions.

I see that you've used:

LICENSE=MIT-like
LICENSE_SPDX="SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT-like"

I don't see 'MIT-like' on https://spdx.org/licenses/, so I wonder if you 
could explain where that comes from?