Thanks Patrice - this was a good reminder that I should write up a longer
explanation (rather than just pointing to the blog posts) as it is a question
that comes up often enough to warrant recording a longer explanation. I thought
I had put something in the FAQ, but don’t see it there. Will
Dear Jilayne,
My post was nothing personal; I can imagine how difficult it is to manage a
community made up of many individuals and interests. All of us should be
grateful for that and the decision to create these "-or-Later" identifiers
was undoubtedly a collective one at the time, but as
at 18:56
To: 'SPDX-legal'
Subject: Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses?
Resent-From:
Resent-Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 09:56:55 -0700
I'm moving the SPDX general list to bcc, as this is really a topic for
spdx-legal.
In case anyone didn't see it
I'm moving the SPDX general list to bcc, as this is really a topic for
spdx-legal.
In case anyone didn't see it and for context, my response to Christian
that Patrice-Emmanuel references is on the spdx-legal thread and can be
seen here: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3548
Some
Hello Christian,
It is a frequent practice from license stewards to encourage the coverage
of later versions of "their" license.
At the very beginning of the EUPL, licensors are invited to specify
"licensed under the EUPL", which, according to the copyleft clause 5,
clearly refers to the latest
Hello SPDX LegalTeam,
I am an RSE working at the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ)
in Potsdam, Germany. I am involved in working groups in Helmholtz that
deal with Research Software Engineering aspects, and am also the
maintainer of the Helmholtz Research Software Directory
