This sounds appealing to me (if I'm understanding it correctly). From Red Hat's perspective one of the great impracticalities of SPDX has been that, after many years of SPDX's existence, its

Hi all, As discussed on a previous call, I’ve added a new doc describing the workflow for adding a new license. This aims to capture the steps for our team members who are shepherding a request

Hi Philippe, I’m a bit lost on what the goal of this is. Can you provide a bit more context. I looked at a couple entries and noticed, for example, this one:

Of course. For those following along, I am @kemitchell on github.com. -- Kyle Mitchell, attorney // Oakland // (510) 712 - 0933

Hi Kyle, Could I please ask you to submit this via our (somewhat) new and improved system as described here:

Full Name: Blue Oak Model License 1.0.0 Short Identifier: BlueOak-1.0.0 Text: https://blueoakcouncil.org/license/1.0.0 Text File: Attached OSI: Not approved. Not submitted. Aside: All other

See https://github.com/nexB/spdx-license-namespaces-registry/ and https://github.com/nexB/spdx-license-namespaces-registry/pull/1 -- Cordially Philippe Ombredanne +1 650 799 0949 |

Hi All, Just a reminder that we have our bi-weekly call this Thursday at 17:00 GMT (9:00AM PT, 10:00 MT, 11:00 CT, 12:00PM ET). As we are getting close to the “deadline” for getting stuff in for

Hi Brad, I agree with you on including just the new text as part of the Libpng-2.0 text for matching purposes. The fact that they've designated the lower part of [2] as being "version 1" suggests to

Hi all, I've added a PR #755 [1] for libpng 2.0, but realized we hadn't explicitly said on the legal call whether this was just going to be the new text (v2 only), or the full text now in the license

Sorry for last minute warning! Sent from my phone, please excuse brevity and typographical errors.

Thank you Alexios, that helped to find the issue. The original one had: "Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any" The Red Hat version has: "Permission to use, copy,

That's ISC: https://spdx.org/licenses/ISC.html -- zvr –

Hello, I've found a permissive license published by Red Hat in 2010 with a wording similar to MIT-like. However, it is shorter and uses substantially different words albeit having the same meaning

I am considering attending but it appears I'd need an invitation to register... are there any invitations available for SPDX as a Linux Foundation Project that participants can use? karen Karen M.

I'll be at the conference -- hoping to be able to attend the SPDX face-to-face on Monday, but I may have another governing board meeting that overlaps that afternoon and might not be able to make it.

Thanks you both! We adopted the Plexus name as category. Problem solved. Kind regards, Max

in an hour - we’ll pick up where we left off from last call! https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team Also: please note - the Open Source Leadership Summit is coming up in Half Moon Bay, March 12-14 -

Thank you Gary and Kate. I’ve reviewed the minutes, and look forward to discussing the topic. As you may guess, my strong basis is towards self-assigned DNS-based namespace with optional

Not to unnecessarily self-promote, but this was the use case that made me write the SPDX-License-Diff chrome extension. https://github.com/spdx/spdx-license-diff. It also should work on Firefox (but