Re: "unclear version" and OR-MAYBE operators (was: update on only/or later etc.)


Philippe Ombredanne
 

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 6:51 AM, W. Trevor King <wking@...> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 08:10:02AM -0700, J Lovejoy wrote:
Just a reminder to all: when someone places a copy of the GPL,
version 2 alongside source code files this does not make the
licensing ambiguous; clearly there is a valid licenseā€¦
[...]
So I think
there is likely to be a substantial set of license-expression authors
who are unwilling to claim a complete conclusion. Is this point still
under contention?
I think there is no contention there at all.
A summary (e.g. a license expression) cannot ever capture all the
nuances of the details.... This is a lossy "compression" by construction...

If we accept a substantial set of partial-concluders, the SPDX needs
to decide what to suggest to them. Folks using SPDX documents can
already use comment sections, but those are unstructured [3]. And
folks using bare license expressions obviously don't have access to
the SPDX-document comment field.
... therefore your input is valuable and well thought out but none of
this extra complexity is needed.

An expression can be in some case not fully conclusive: when this
happens this information can be provided in an SPDX doc elsewhere such
as notes or else as you rightly noted.

Folks using only license expression are typically using them in
another context which is to document their own code or package
license: there is no ambiguity there and therefore no need to add
extra complexity to capture something that does not exist.

In some cases such as here, perfect is the enemy of the good.
Please, let's try to keep this spec simple!

--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne

Join Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org to automatically receive all group messages.