Hi all, A few months ago we began a project to update the license inclusion principles (as well as some other documentation updates in terms of both substance and location).
Specifically, currently the license inclusion guidelines are posted here: https://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/license-list-overview These were written around 2013 and we recently recognized a need to update them. (We also had decided we ought to move them to the Github repo, but that is somewhat tangentially to the substantive question here.) We have made a first draft of changes based on discussions on the calls https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2019-05-02 You can see that initial iteration here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/master/DOCS/license-inclusion-principles.md We recognized there would need to be further iterations. In particular, we have had recent submissions that are arguably not substantive open source licenses (e.g., Commons Clause, Polyform licenses) - should these be included on the SPDX License List and if so, then how does the inclusion principles need to change and where do we draw the line? Can you please comment on the Github issue here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/925 , so we can iterate on this and then come to a final, new set of inclusion principles. Thanks, Jilayne -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#2662): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/2662 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/33155463/21656 Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
