Hello,
https://spdx.org/licenses/freertos-exception-2.0.html refers to
http://www.freertos.org/a00114.html#exception This page refers to the MIT
instead of the FreeRTOS exception.
The reason is:
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/announcing-freertos-kernel-v10/
You might correct the link
Thanks for clarification!
Best,
Till
Am 18.04.2018 um 17:05 schrieb Wayne Beaton:
> FWIW, it is the perspective the Eclipse Foundation that, from the point of
> view of a consumer, the notion of secondary license is effectively the same
> as dual licensing. We therefore encourage our projects
Hi Trevor,
Thanks for your quick reply!
Am 16.04.2018 um 21:24 schrieb W. Trevor King:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 01:46:26PM +0200, Till Jaeger via Spdx-legal wrote:
>> EPL-2.0 exists in two forms as well (with or without Exhibit A
>> making it compatible to the GPL).
>
Dear all,
Perhaps I missed that you have an Identifier for both versions of EPL-2.0. I
found just EPL-2.0 whereas MPL-2.0 is splitted in
MPL-2.0
MPL-2.0-no-copyleft-exception
EPL-2.0 exists in two forms as well (with or without Exhibit A making it
compatible to the GPL).
Could you direct me
wrote:
>
> Hi Till,
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Till Jaeger via Spdx-legal
> <spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org <mailto:spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org>> wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > I had a look into the new version of the SPDX license list and I t
Hello!
I had a look into the new version of the SPDX license list and I think it is
a good idea to distinguish GPL-2.0-only and GPL-2.0-or-later.
However, I have not found the variant for:
"If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may
choose any version ever
