On 2019-06-03 20:06, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> Phil Odence:
> > And, also, bear in mind that SPDX can handle any
> > license. Worst case, you identify a local license
> > identifier and include the license. The goal of the
> > license list is to minimize the need to do that, but at
> > the same
Phil Odence:
> And, also, bear in mind that SPDX can handle any license. Worst case, you
> identify a local license identifier and include the license. The goal of the
> license list is to minimize the need to do that, but at the same time, this
> keeps the list from being a constraint.
For
And, also, bear in mind that SPDX can handle any license. Worst case, you
identify a local license identifier and include the license. The goal of the
license list is to minimize the need to do that, but at the same time, this
keeps the list from being a constraint.
From:
I want to point out that with the adoption of license namespaces a large number
of such cases would be delegated.
So, even if, for example, Intel firmware binaries are “popular” and found in
lots of Linux distribution, the creation (and curation) of licenses like
