Re: meeting Thursday

2017-11-09 Thread J Lovejoy
Oops, that would be Tuesday, Nov 21st for our next call at the tech teams time! Sent from an ARM powered device  Original message From: J Lovejoy Date: 11/09/2017 13:42 (GMT-07:00) To: SPDX-legal Subject: Re:

Partial conclusions and ambiguous grants (was: only/or later and the goals of SPDX)

2017-11-09 Thread W. Trevor King
On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 01:55:55PM -0700, J Lovejoy wrote: > On Nov 9, 2017, at 12:54 PM, W. Trevor King wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:12:39PM -0700, W. Trevor King wrote: > >> The ambiguous operator (first floated as “unclear version” in > >> [3]) and my OR-MAYBE proposal [4] are both

Re: only/or later and the goals of SPDX

2017-11-09 Thread J Lovejoy
> On Nov 9, 2017, at 12:54 PM, W. Trevor King wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:12:39PM -0700, W. Trevor King wrote: >> The ambiguous operator (first floated as “unclear version” in [3]) >> and my OR-MAYBE proposal [4] are both attempts to allow an SPDX >> License

Re: meeting Thursday

2017-11-09 Thread J Lovejoy
Hi all, Thanks again for another thorough discussion with many participants! I have now posted the meeting minutes here: https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2017-11-09 Please do let me know if I’ve gotten anything wrong.

Re: only/or later and the goals of SPDX

2017-11-09 Thread J Lovejoy
> On Nov 9, 2017, at 10:48 AM, John Sullivan wrote: > > "Wheeler, David A" writes: > >> John Sullivan: >>> A key part is missing in the description of the original FSF proposal here >>> though -- which is deprecating the existing GPL-2.0 and similar "plain"

Re: only/or later and the goals of SPDX

2017-11-09 Thread John Sullivan
"Wheeler, David A" writes: > John Sullivan: >> A key part is missing in the description of the original FSF proposal here >> though -- which is deprecating the existing GPL-2.0 and similar "plain" >> identifiers for GNU licenses so that the identifiers used always indicate >>