J Lovejoy wrote just now:

I agree that it would be productive to discuss these at the same time,

I was on the call today as well, and as I mentioned there, I was the person
who initially asked they be considered separately, but as Fontana says....

Fontana wrote:

Re-reading the GitHub issue, I remembered that this list had an earlier
thread about whether an SPDX identifier would be appropriate for the
commitment texts published by Red Hat and other companies at the launch
of what we now call the GPL Cooperation Commitment initiative. Since that
time, the GPL Cooperation Commitment has been slightly expanded to
include a form suitable for inclusion in source trees, much as the Linux
Kernel Enforcement Statement is included in the kernel source tree.

...the GithHub issue was filed and discussed was *before* the GPL Cooperation
Commitment was written down as an additional permission designed for
licensing.

Now that the Cooperation Commitment and Kernel Enforcement Statement are both
written up this way, we should certainly talk about them together.

Thus, can we all aim for the Nov 29th call? Of course, happy to carry on
the discussion on the mailing list in the meantime.

Yeah, Nov 29th is fine for me, thanks for accommodating my and Karen's
schedule.

I'm glad to discuss it on the mailing list in meantime if folks want that
too!
--
Bradley M. Kuhn

Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy:
https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/