On 12/17/2015 02:46 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: >> On Dec 17, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote: >> >> On 12/17/2015 12:38 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: >>> That sounds like a reasonable result, all things considered. >> >> I don't care what OSI does. >> >>> I’ll add a note to the Notes field of Zero Clause BSD License >>> to the same effect on the upcoming release of the SPDX License List. >> >> Please don't. Pretty please? >> >> > Hi Rob, > > What I had in mind was: where it says “Note” on this page > http://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html, to add something along > the lines of capturing the following facts:
It's not the wording. It's acknowledging their mistake's existence. > "There is a license that the OSI approved after this license was added > to the SPDX License List and which is identical to this license, but > referred to there as "Free Public License 1.0.0”. Apart from the name, > the only difference is that the Free Public License is used without a > copyright notice, whereas the Zero Clause BSD License has generally > been used with a copyright notice. This difference, as per the SPDX > License List Matching Guidelines, is inconsequential for matching purposes." > > By adding some info, we avoid someone later asking why there are there > are different names for essentially the same license on SPDX and OSI. And by adding that info, I get those questions, so I need to update my license.html page to preemptively explain about OSI. I was hoping not to open that can of worms. Could you maybe wait for somebody to ask about it first? I honestly don't believe anyone reads OSI's licensing page anymore. I do expect them to read SPDX's. > Please feel free to edit, if you have better wording in mind. It's not the wording. You have the right to put whatever you want on your web page, just like OSI can say what it likes on their page. But if you validate what OSI says, it makes me need to set the record straight on _my_ page, and I was really trying not to go there. If you must you must, you have your own policies to follow. I'm just not looking forward to it. Rob P.S. Any course of action you can shoot down by linking to an XKCD strip is probably not a good idea, and in this case it's http://xkcd.com/386. Unfortunately, http://www.schlockmercenary.com/2006-07-13 also applies. I'm going to back away from this thread again, I no longer believe I'm helping here. _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
