|
meeting minutes (for last 2 meetings)
… have now been posted:
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-09-04
and
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-09-18
Our next call is Thursday, October 2 at 11am Mtn Time.
… have now been posted:
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-09-04
and
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2014-09-18
Our next call is Thursday, October 2 at 11am Mtn Time.
|
By
J Lovejoy
·
#965
·
|
|
Introduction: SPDX Report Library
I would like to announce the availability of the SPDX Report Library. The objective of this program is to create a repository of articles to capture and share community knowledge about anything and
I would like to announce the availability of the SPDX Report Library. The objective of this program is to create a repository of articles to capture and share community knowledge about anything and
|
By
Mark Gisi
·
#964
·
|
|
SPDX X-Ray
Hi,
I would like to announce the availability of X-Ray, Wind River’s latest free SPDX reporting service available at spdx.windriver.com. X-Ray delivers SPDX data in a very human friendly
Hi,
I would like to announce the availability of X-Ray, Wind River’s latest free SPDX reporting service available at spdx.windriver.com. X-Ray delivers SPDX data in a very human friendly
|
By
Sameer Ahmed
·
#963
·
|
|
Re: question: SPDX license for "The Linux Foundation"
(exactly my point!)
But I assume that I (I am NOT the copyright holder) cannot simply drop the existing wording and state that it is "BSD-3-Clause"; correct?
So it would be great if a new item WAS
(exactly my point!)
But I assume that I (I am NOT the copyright holder) cannot simply drop the existing wording and state that it is "BSD-3-Clause"; correct?
So it would be great if a new item WAS
|
By
Steve Rae <srae@...>
·
#962
·
|
|
Re: question: SPDX license for "The Linux Foundation"
The only material difference with BSD-3-Clause seems to be in the disclaimer :
[...] FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT ARE DISCLAIMED [...]
where
"AND NON-INFRINGEMENT" is
The only material difference with BSD-3-Clause seems to be in the disclaimer :
[...] FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT ARE DISCLAIMED [...]
where
"AND NON-INFRINGEMENT" is
|
By
Philippe Ombredanne
·
#961
·
|
|
question: SPDX license for "The Linux Foundation"
Which SPDX license matches this text?
/*
* Copyright (c) 2009, Google Inc.
* All rights reserved.
*
* Copyright (c) 2009-2014, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution
Which SPDX license matches this text?
/*
* Copyright (c) 2009, Google Inc.
* All rights reserved.
*
* Copyright (c) 2009-2014, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution
|
By
Steve Rae <srae@...>
·
#960
·
|
|
reminder for call today
Hi All,
A quick reminder that we have a legal team call today. We’ll have an update from LinuxCon and discuss Mark’s latest draft of the license expression syntax.
(I have another call prior,
Hi All,
A quick reminder that we have a legal team call today. We’ll have an update from LinuxCon and discuss Mark’s latest draft of the license expression syntax.
(I have another call prior,
|
By
J Lovejoy
·
#959
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Thank you Gary. We can discuss the + operator feedback at the next legal working group meeting.
- Mark
Thank you Gary. We can discuss the + operator feedback at the next legal working group meeting.
- Mark
|
By
Mark Gisi
·
#958
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Hi Mark,
Thanks for working on this!
I finally got some time to go through your document in detail. Overall, looks good.
I only had 2 comments:
- The example in section III 1) has an
Hi Mark,
Thanks for working on this!
I finally got some time to go through your document in detail. Overall, looks good.
I only had 2 comments:
- The example in section III 1) has an
|
By
Gary O'Neall
·
#957
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Ok, thanks. That is good to know, glad that either forms can be used.
With kind regards,
Nuno Brito
--
http://triplecheck.de
phone: +49 615 146 03187
Ok, thanks. That is good to know, glad that either forms can be used.
With kind regards,
Nuno Brito
--
http://triplecheck.de
phone: +49 615 146 03187
|
By
Nuno Brito
·
#956
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
FWIW, Gary and I were chatting at Linuxcon and he mentioned that his tools and libraries are case insensitive. The 1.2 specification appears to use lowercase "and" and "or" in the description of
FWIW, Gary and I were chatting at Linuxcon and he mentioned that his tools and libraries are case insensitive. The 1.2 specification appears to use lowercase "and" and "or" in the description of
|
By
Lamons, Scott (Open Source Program Office) <scott.lamons@...>
·
#955
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Hi Bruno,
Thank you for the feedback. We never did discuss whether the syntax should be case sensitive or not. We will include that in our discussions.
Best,
Mark
Hi Bruno,
Thank you for the feedback. We never did discuss whether the syntax should be case sensitive or not. We will include that in our discussions.
Best,
Mark
|
By
Mark Gisi
·
#954
·
|
|
Re: SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Hi Mark, all,
I find the syntax examples very straightforward and useful.
On some cases is used "and" (example #9) and in others is used "AND", I assume that "AND" is the desired format or can both
Hi Mark, all,
I find the syntax examples very straightforward and useful.
On some cases is used "and" (example #9) and in others is used "AND", I assume that "AND" is the desired format or can both
|
By
Nuno Brito
·
#953
·
|
|
reminder: no meeting tomorrow
Hi All,
Just a reminder that we will not have our regularly scheduled call tomorrow, Thursday, 21 August due to a bunch of us being at LinuxCon North America this week.
We will be back to our
Hi All,
Just a reminder that we will not have our regularly scheduled call tomorrow, Thursday, 21 August due to a bunch of us being at LinuxCon North America this week.
We will be back to our
|
By
J Lovejoy
·
#952
·
|
|
SPDX 2.0 Spec draft: Seeking community feedback for the License Expression Syntax section
Attached is the draft of the SPDX Legal Working group’s License Expression Syntax for the upcoming SPDX 2.0 Specification. We are seeking community feedback by September 12th.
Overview:
Often a
Attached is the draft of the SPDX Legal Working group’s License Expression Syntax for the upcoming SPDX 2.0 Specification. We are seeking community feedback by September 12th.
Overview:
Often a
|
By
Mark Gisi
·
#951
·
|
|
Re: SPDX License List v1.20 is now LIVE!!
Amazing. I know how much work this takes. Tom
Tom Incorvia;tom.incorvia@...;O: (512) 340-1336; M: (215) 500 8838; Shoretel (Internal): X27015
Amazing. I know how much work this takes. Tom
Tom Incorvia;tom.incorvia@...;O: (512) 340-1336; M: (215) 500 8838; Shoretel (Internal): X27015
|
By
Tom Incorvia
·
#950
·
|
|
Re: SPDX License List v1.20 is now LIVE!!
NICE WORK!
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Thomas H. Vidal, Esq.
Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP
5900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2250
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Direct Dial: 310.300.2950 |
NICE WORK!
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Thomas H. Vidal, Esq.
Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP
5900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2250
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Direct Dial: 310.300.2950 |
|
By
Tom Vidal <TVidal@...>
·
#949
·
|
|
Re: SPDX License List v1.20 is now LIVE!!
You should be thrilled. And we should all be thankful for the great work of Jilayne, Paul and the Legal Team. Huge Kudos!
From: Jilayne Lovejoy <opensource@...>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:46:44
You should be thrilled. And we should all be thankful for the great work of Jilayne, Paul and the Legal Team. Huge Kudos!
From: Jilayne Lovejoy <opensource@...>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:46:44
|
By
Philip Odence
·
#948
·
|
|
SPDX License List v1.20 is now LIVE!!
On behalf of the SPDX Legal Team, I’m thrilled to announce that SPDX License List v1.20 is now live. You can find the updated web pages in the usual spot, http://spdx.org/licenses/, which also
On behalf of the SPDX Legal Team, I’m thrilled to announce that SPDX License List v1.20 is now live. You can find the updated web pages in the usual spot, http://spdx.org/licenses/, which also
|
By
J Lovejoy
·
#947
·
|
|
Re: question regarding the information to be provided in case of files containing a license text
Hi Jilayne,
This is excellent. Right now I'm working in other topics but I'm looking forward to add these new items. Will report back in case some typo is found.
In the meanwhile, looking on the
Hi Jilayne,
This is excellent. Right now I'm working in other topics but I'm looking forward to add these new items. Will report back in case some typo is found.
In the meanwhile, looking on the
|
By
Nuno Brito
·
#946
·
|