Hi All, Just a reminder that due to the regularly scheduled legal call falling on a US holiday this Thursday, we will join the tech team today. Dial-in info: Web conference:

Hi David, If this is a potential problem once GPL-2.0 is changed to GPL-2.0-only, then it is currently a problem. And perhaps by altering the current identifier (GPL-2.0) to be more explicit

I understand and agree with David's concerns - also coming from a tooling perspective. However, I believe this is a different problem than the FSF issue and a problem we have today with the current

Brad Edmondson [mailto:brad.edmondson@...] No, it fails to work for multiple reasons: 1. "NOASSERTION" is basically useless, because it provides no information. In many cases, all I need to

J Lovejoy <opensource@...> writes: Thanks to everyone for working with us on this! -john -- John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation GPG Key: A462 6CBA FF37 6039 D2D7

Hi David, I think your points are good ones, but it seems to me they go to the separate issues of "file:detected license" and "package:concluded license." The clarity of the spec argument is aimed

J Lovejoy: I disagree, sorry. No, this is the *reason* that there's a problem. The *reason* that "GPL-2.0" isn't working is, in part, because it overloads two notions. "GPL-2.0" is supposed to

Jilayne Lovejoy <opensource@...>: This "resolution" doesn't solve the problem. Since tools are not yet sentient, tools often *cannot* determine if "or later" was intended. Yet "don't know"

Great. We will start calling you two Kings Solomon. From: <spdx-legal-bounces@...> on behalf of Jilayne Lovejoy <opensource@...> Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017 at 7:38 PM To: SPDX-legal

I think this is a good overall solution. It solves the issue raised by the FSF and is reasonably compatible. On the last legal call, I raised a concern that it didn't handle the case where the

Wow! Hopefully this resolves this issue for the foreseeable future (as I think it should). I echo Karen's sentiments -- great work! As far as the next release, to my mind, the biggest open issue is

There are so many things I admire about the people involved and the process that has been followed to get to this proposal for consensus. Many thanks for all Jilayne and Kate and so many others have

This is really great news. This was a difficult issue that sparked a lot of folks to join our SPDX Legal/Technical calls to the point we needed more con call space. We are fortunate to have such a

I think this “deprecation with an eventual removal” approach is part of all of the proposals, and is not unique to the “coin new per-version license identifiers” approach. I am strongly

Hi All, Kate and I just had a call with Richard Stallman of the FSF to try and come to a resolution everyone can be happy with, taking into consideration the ask from the FSF and the many thorough

Instead of creating a new event for this joint session, folks who have imported the legal-team meeting may find it more convenient if we add the new time to an existing, recurring legal-team meeting.

Jilayne Lovejoy invited you to “SPDX tech/legal call”. when

Hi all, In light of the LF getting our main conference line fixed to not be limited to 10 people, I have updated the calendar invite for the rest of the year, as I”m not sure if that will populate

Jilayne Lovejoy invited you to “SPDX Legal call”. when

“SPDX Legal call” has been updated.