Dear Jilayne, Yes, I would say that's pretty normal for software projects. Incrementing the major version usually indicates that upgrading to that version would break something for existing users

I don’t think it’s an issue. To developers, 3.20 is normal and won’t be confused as 3.2. I would advocate moving to semantic versioning where it uses a triplet (e.g. 3.20.0) and each part of

Hi all, As I was adding milestones to the Github repo for the next couple releases, I wondered... do we just keep going with 3.18, 3.19, 3.20... (and 3.20 looks a lot like 3.2,

Hi all, We have our regularly scheduled legal team meeting today in about an hour - at noon Eastern Daylight Savings time. We’ll focus on clearing out any tasks, issues, PRs for the 3.17

This is a wonderful improvement! It's an announcement worthy of the 'topic' for our #spdx IRC channel :) Best wishes, Sebastian

Thank you Gary, Rohit and the GSoC students! I saw that the test license requests are coming through, so thanks for that in particular :) Steve

The SPDX online tools upgrade is now complete. This release upgrades our Python version from 2.7 to version 3.X moving us to a more supported software base. There are also several improvements.

Just FYI – We will be doing a significant upgrade to the SPDX online tools this morning. The SPDX online tools will be offline this morning for a few minutes to a few hours depending on how the

Am 06.04.22 um 10:02 schrieb Matija Šuklje: What about "LicenseRef"? https://spdx.dev/spdx-specification-21-web-version/#h.1v1yuxt https://reuse.software/faq/#custom-license Accordingly, this would

Die 6. 04. 22 et hora 01:07 J Lovejoy scripsit: To my understanding of the spec the following should indicate full copyright: `SPDX-License-Identfier:

Hi Roland, I’m forwarding this to the SPDX-legal mailing list as that is the best place for this question. You also need to join that to post. I don’t have the link to that handy but if you go to

Hi all, We have our regular 4th Thursday of the month legal team meeting in just under an hour. We'll tend to the usual issues and I'm also hoping to talk a bit about updates

Hi all, As follow-up to our discussion on the last call re: removing the license list FAQ from the webpage (https://spdx.dev/faq/) and replacing that with a link to the same in

Hi Philippe, ~ Philippe Ombredanne [2022-03-10 18:33 +0100]: IIUC, this is not changing the text of the LGPL license in SPDX, but adding an optional segment. This optional text does not come out of

Steve, Max: FWIW, I already voiced my objection on this topic in the past and I think this is going to be a source of confusion and ambiguity. Why would we need to change the SPDX text for the

Sorry for the last minute notice. Our regular call on the 2nd Thursday of the month is today. We'll continue with our usual look at current issues and any other bigger topics

Hi Max, circling back on this thread and your question: We briefly discussed this as a follow-up on the last legal team call, and agreed that there did not appear to be any significant objections to

As per our new 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month schedule, we have a legal call today (in ~10') Sorry for the last minute reminder!! Jilayne

Hi everyone! As you might have heard, the SPDX project will again this year try to participate in the Google Summer of Code initiative. For those who have not heard about it, GSoC is a “global,

In case anyone got confused by the subject of this email (which I've now corrected) - the meeting is indeed still on Thursdays. Not today, which would have been "tomorrow" when I sent