Re: A non-standard "permissive" license


guillaume.rousseau@antelink.com
 

It seems this is part of this use case http://spdx.org/wiki/license-list-extension
Does [OK] mean it will supported by SPDX 2.0 ?
If yes, I guess that it means that implementation for SPDX 2.0 will fail to support collision if it exists (according to the wiki page) and will need to update internal list to avoid collision.
Which is fine if we know that we can update internal list once for all, without having to deal with further SPDX license list update.
Shall we update this use case or propose a new one for 2.1 use case ?
Let me know, I can make a first draft of the use case or the scenario.

Guillaume

Le 05/03/13 13:24, Philippe Ombredanne a écrit :
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Tom Incorvia
<tom.incorvia@...> wrote:
I believe that we will be best served by having as broad a license list as
possible, and to have every license on the list be supported.
If the Leptonica license occurs in the wild and has consistent, matchable
license text, lets vet it an put it into the SPDX list just like any other
license.
This is an interesting case. I am not sure that we should support as
broad a list as possible.
The current SPDX spec has support for direct reference (LicenseRef) to
these less common license texts as-is without giving them a name and
needing to include them in the list.

While this is probably not SPDX role to take sides in the license
proliferation debate, all licenses are not equal and may not deserve
the implicit promotion of being included as an SPDX "named" license
list. Giving an SPDX name to a license grants it an implied prominence
and promotion as the SPDX license list is becoming the de-facto
reference for many. We have certainly a responsibility there: in
promoting a license by including it in the SPDX list it is likely to
become less rare. Beside there is a clear maintenance burden on us to
manage a large unbounded list of SPDX licenses.

With that said, Guillaume point to private naming of licenses is a
valid one. That could be best supported by supporting appropriate
private namespacing (which is something RDF does very well) and could
be something to design for future specs versions
--
Guillaume ROUSSEAU
CEO, Co-Founder, Antelink
Président, Cofondateur, Antelink

18, rue Yves Toudic, 75010, Paris 10ème, France
http://www.antelink.com/
Office : +33 1 42 39 30 78

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