Die 19. 06. 20 et hora 03:00 J Lovejoy scripsit:
> Thanks Till for weighing in here!
FWIW, another lawyerly +1 on Till‘s analysis from me.
> (a) A technical question: When generating SPDX data at the file level, how
> does one identify the LICENSE.txt file? Various ideas have been raised
> here
Hi all,
Thanks Till for weighing in here!
I think there are two general issues that come up here:
(a) A technical question: When generating SPDX data at the file level, how does
one identify the LICENSE.txt file?
Various ideas have been raised here. Some of you might be interested to know
(if
Hi all,
I have some remarks from a lawyer's perspective who is scanning source code
and/or has to deal with the results from scanning.
1.
It is helpful if the license text file is differently identified from
licensed source files. There are some reasons for that:
- This license text is not licens
Hi Richard:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 2:57 PM Richard Purdie wrote:
> Just to be really clear, the license ID of a given specific
> package *is* correct and definitive. What is unclear is the license of
> the license information.
>
> The challenge is that one software project can be split into mult
On Thu, 2020-06-18 at 11:35 +, Zavras, Alexios wrote:
> You might want to consider using something more general, like
> LicenseRef-FSF-license-text or even LicenseRef-license-text, to use
> the same for all license files...
I think "LicenseRef-license-text" is inappropriate as the different
te
On Thu, 2020-06-18 at 14:31 +0200, Philippe Ombredanne wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:37 AM Richard Purdie
> wrote:
>
> > If we set the license of the licence text package to include GPL-
> > 3.0,
> > the legal department blocks the release since they said "no GPL-
> > 3.0".
> > If you tell
Hi Richard:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:37 AM Richard Purdie
wrote:
> If we set the license of the licence text package to include GPL-3.0,
> the legal department blocks the release since they said "no GPL-3.0".
> If you tell them its only the license text, they tell you the license
> is not GPL-
:20
To: Steve Winslow
Cc: SPDX-legal
Subject: Re: License of an open source license text
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 20:24 -0400, Steve Winslow wrote:
> Hi Richard, thanks for the detailed explanation -- I think I
> understand your use case better now.
>
> What I'd suggest would probab
On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 20:24 -0400, Steve Winslow wrote:
> Hi Richard, thanks for the detailed explanation -- I think I
> understand your use case better now.
>
> What I'd suggest would probably be that if you do want to represent
> this, one way might be to use a "LicenseRef-" identifier. This is
Hi Richard, thanks for the detailed explanation -- I think I understand
your use case better now.
What I'd suggest would probably be that if you do want to represent this,
one way might be to use a "LicenseRef-" identifier. This is compatible with
(and defined in) the SPDX spec, and REUSE also inc
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the reply, it matches my first take on understanding this
situation and is what we do today, however, we're seeing some push back
from our users and I do think they have a point to some extent. I had
hoped there was an existing solution/convention we could follow but it
appear
"Steve Winslow" writes:
> But I don't think the license list has gotten into (or has plans to get
> into) including identifiers for which licenses apply to licenses
> themselves.
It might be worth noting that one reason for this is that some license
texts are not themselves released under an ope
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your email. A couple of thoughts, speaking just for myself:
When it comes to the question of "what license applies to a license text,"
I think this is something that has typically been seen as outside the scope
of the SPDX License List. The licenses on the list cover those
Hi,
I work on the Yocto Project and we use SDPX identifiers when working
with open source licenses. An issue has come up and it was suggested I
ask about it here.
The question is quite simple:
Which licence are we using when we share just the license text?
The background is more complex:
YP ha
14 matches
Mail list logo
