I would suggest, though, that if we do this we strongly discourage people from using these identifiers for the 'copyright + SPDX-Identifier but no boilerplate' license scenarios. Since Fedora--, etc

Since we're all expressing agreement, let me add mine... and remind that we have this wonderful construct that can be used for "list of licenses curated by a single entity but not necessarily on the

Die 16. 08. 21 et hora 19:10 J Lovejoy scripsit: I don’t have much to add to what has been said so far, but just want to add a big fat +1 on everything said so far. cheers, Matija --

Hi Karsten: <karsten.klein@...> wrote: A big +1 for this. (And until then, namespaced LicenseRef- are an OK approach) -- Cordially Philippe Ombredanne +1 650 799 0949 |

LicenseRef is a good escape valve, even for the Free Licenses that aren't yet part of SPDX, or that are marginal cases until they can be prompted to full SPDX identifiers. It's also a good way to

Hi Jilayne, My 2 cents. The license list should be able to have all non-proprietary licenses in it that are used in a distro image(be it Debian or Fedora or Yocto-derivative, etc.) If a license

Hi Jilayne, My gut reaction (not knowing specifics about the number of licenses in question) is, yes, ideally the scope of licenses on the license list would be sufficient to cover at least any

Hi all, I wanted to raise a question I've been thinking of in light for Fedora and other open source OS distros looking to adopt use of SPDX license identifiers in various ways. One concern that

Hello all, The version 3.14 release of the license list is now tagged and live at https://spdx.org/licenses. 13 new licenses were added to the

Thanks for the forward! It appears to be open for public comment now > (Btw, this message got caught up as from a non-member - not sure if you used a different email address?)I specifically entered

Quoting J Lovejoy (2021-08-05 05:52:13) Since I assume it is not only relevant if those licenses identified by Fedora exists "in the wild" only _distributed_ by Fedora, I can suggest to also make

Hi Sebastian, I knew/hoped there'd be some SPDX'ers who were also Fedora fans! See comment below on where folks familiar with SPDX could be of most help: On

Hi all, Sorry for the delay in responding, I got busy with other things and needed some time to fully re-read this thread and absorb everything. Thanks to Max, Matija, and

Dear Jilayne, That's great news! I have been using Fedora for about two years as my primary operating system, so hearing about this development is particularly interesting to me. Wow - that's an

Hi Anthony, Thanks for pointing this out. I tried to add a comment, but it appears to be closed. Thomas is active in the SPDX-tech team, but would be nice if someone from the SPDX-legal could add a

Hi Lars, I've just added comments in both threads giving a +1 to add each of these. If others from the legal team community can add in (so that we've got approval per

Hi, I have requests open for two Creative Commons ports, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 FR and CC BY 3.0 NL. Could those still be included in this release, or is it too late for that? I can prepare the files today

Hi all, We are going to aim for the end of next week for the 3.14 release - giving everyone an extra week to tidy up any outstanding issues. So, if you haven't gotten to

Dear Sebastian, Max: That's the source of the issue. License texts in SPDX have never been designed to be used as a reference for attribution. This is unfortunately commonly done but ends up more