Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] requirements of a new project in GNU Savannah

[Assaf Gordon]

Hello,

Attached is an improved version of the evaluation script.
It adds color (for better readability), better suggestions and explanations,
and for non-caninocal copyrights and licenses, it shows a fragment of the found 
text (for easier evaluation).

Code is here:
  http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/gnu_savannah_eval.pl

===

Based on the output of this version, I think the following submissions can be 
approved:

1. DirEvent/DirCond:
https://savannah.gnu.org/task/?13296
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/DirEvent.2014-08-18-183835.html

The few files without detected copyright/licenses are either small or 
auto-generated.
The few mentions of "linux" refer to linux kernel interface.
At the bottom of the report are listed all the source files, and they seem 
properly GPL'd.


2. SciTE-proj
https://savannah.gnu.org/task/?13282
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/SciTE-proj.2014-08-18-183834.html

The three image files are properly mentioned in the README file (checked 
manually, this isn't shown in the report).


3. JNoteBook
https://savannah.gnu.org/task/?13287
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/JNoteBook.2014-08-18-183836.html

One source code file is GPL'd.
Four image files just need to be mentioned in README (or perhaps this is not 
even a requirement?)

====

This submission needs more checking:

4. RufasGate
https://savannah.gnu.org/task/?13293
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/RufasGate.2014-08-18-183836.html

Some source files are not copyrighted (and they are  longer than 10 lines, but 
shorter than 30),
The license of the numerous datafiles needs to checked.

====

For comparison, evaluation of three GNU packages:
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/GNU-coreutils.2014-08-18-183813.html
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/GNU-sed.2014-08-18-183833.html
http://files.housegordon.org/gnu_eval1/GNU-tar.2014-08-18-183831.html


On 08/18/2014 06:20 PM, Karl Berry wrote:
>      I'm also contemplating having this script hosted on a server with a
>      simple CGI, so users can post a URL of a tarball of git repository
>      and get the results quickly without downloading and running the script.
>
> I was thinking about that too, but your wget recipe is so simple, it
> seemed sufficient, and perhaps actually desirable -- if the submitter
> can't be bothered to run a single cookbook command, chances are the
> submission is useless.
>
> On the other hand, the downside of hosting it as a cgi is, of course,
> security.  Seems like a good thing to avoid.

True, and it's easy enough to run locally.

But,
I tried to make the Perl script as secure as possible (and improvements are 
always welcomed),
and I think that if we have such a web-based service, we could extend it beyond 
just GNU Savannah:
Users could enter any URL (e.g. git/hg repository from 
Github/SourceForge/Gitorious) and get a report about
the copyright and licensing of their project.

That could help any project apply proper free-software license in their 
projects...

Just a thought.


- Assaf.