Re: "Scope" of licenses to be covered by SPDX
Jilayne Lovejoy <jilayne.lovejoy@...>
On 6/29/12 8:50 AM, "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@...> wrote:
NO! That is not what Phil meant. There is no judgment implied by
"standard" or "non-standard" (but the fact that a judgement could be
implicated it is exactly why I lobbied early on to lose that terminology).
The SPDX License List is just that - a list of licenses. We started by
making sure we had all of the OSI licenses, then people involved suggested
other commonly found open source licenses. And while maybe the list
doesn't look like much to the first-time looker, to get to this point
(already at it's 16th version) meant: deciding upon fields to include and
how to define those fields; deciding on naming and short identifiers
protocols for consistency; finding urls for each license; finding the
actual text of the license; checking whether that license is (or was) OSI
approved; coordinating with OSI when they adopted the short identifiers,
so all links and short identifiers cross-checked; generating the HTML
pages for each license; making sure the license text was correct (and
didn't lose crucial formatting); otherwise catching human errors in the
various processes; etc., etc.... This is actually quite a bit of work and
has been done by a small number of people.
Do we need to expand the list? YES! Do we know we would like to
collaborate with other lists such that the SPDX License List lines up with
other such lists and vice versa? YES! I think we are all in agreement on
that last point.
The issue here isn't knowing what needs to be done, it is having the
people-power to get it done sooner rather than later. (yes, I know, I'm
beginning to sound like a broken record... and with that, I will put away
my soap box and hope to hear some new voices on the next legal call :)
Jilayne Lovejoy (SPDX Legal work group co-lead)
Corporate Counsel | OpenLogic, Inc.
jlovejoy@... | 720 240 4545
Spdx-legal mailing list