On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 07:04:57PM +0000, Gisi, Mark wrote:

> >> With the ‘only’ operator proposal [1], this situation can be
> >> represented by ‘CDDL-1.0 only’.
> 
> … Finally this case can be elegantly handled with a LicenseRef…

But you can't define a LicenseRef in sitations (like npm [1]) where
the only thing you can set is a license expression and you don't have
access to the broader SPDX spec.

> That is, the example represents a rare edge case that does not
> present a situation that can't be express with today's current
> constructs. Therefore it does not represent a good example
> (justification) for adding the "only" operator.

It's not the only justification.  Having an ‘only’ operator also lets
you give a very clear license expression (e.g. ‘GPL-2.0 only’) for
grants like:

  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
  it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
  published by the Free Software Foundation.

which is one of the goals listed in [2].

That's a distinct license expression from ‘GPL-2.0’ for cases like “I
found this license text in a separate file, but no clear grant
applying it to this project” which is the “GitHub example” that
spawned this thread.  Although as discussed in this thread, some SPDX
authors and tools may feel uncomfortable making a concluded-license
call in that case.  However, I expect tools like licensee, which only
look for stand-alone license files and ignore grant comments [3], will
be concluding ‘GPL-2.0’ and similar, and having an explicit ‘only’
operator allows consumers to distinguish those ambiguous conclusions
from an explicit ‘GPL-2.0+’ or ‘GPL-2.0 only’.

Cheers,
Trevor

[1]: https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#license
[2]: https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/only-operator-proposal#Goals
[3]: 
https://github.com/benbalter/licensee/blob/v9.2.0/docs/what-we-look-at.md#what-about-checking-every-single-file-for-a-copyright-header

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Spdx-legal mailing list
Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal

Reply via email to