If there is time left during the meeting on Thursday, we may also discuss the following issue (and I'd encourage folks to take a look and weigh in there as well): 3. Adding NONE to the License Express

Hi Sebastian, thanks for this — this is an interesting proposal! I want to give it some more thought, but here are a couple initial reactions: For MATCHES-LICENSE, I gather the idea is that this is in

Hi Gary, thanks for all of the above. Just one comment for folks on the list of agenda items -- for items 2 and 3, I think this may have accidentally copied over the same problem statement as item 1:

Greetings SPDX tech and legal teams, A reminder we are continuing the license namespace policy discussions on this Friday, July 1, 2022, at the same time as the prior meetings (15:00 UTC, 11AM Eastern

If I'm following the discussion correctly, I'd agree with Warner here. If I take code that I received under BSD-2-Clause and I redistribute it under MIT, I'm really redistributing it under MIT subject

Jilayne, this is awesome news -- thanks for passing it along! Looking forward to us working with the Fedora community to support them adding SPDX license IDs across the distro. Steve

Hello all, The version 3.18 release of the license list is now tagged and live at https://spdx.org/licenses. 10 new licenses / exceptions were added to the list: CC-BY-3.0-IGO GStreamer-exception-2005

Hi Jilayne, since you asked for input ASAP, here are a few immediate gut reactions :) I think getting the data of seeing a bunch of different ways that people said "this code is released into the publ

Thanks for the clarification Jilayne! If the idea is to collect information about the different forms used to say "this is in the public domain" with an eye towards option 3, then yes, I think your pr

Sebastian, this is awesome! I did have the same reaction as Alexios. I think we'll want to tweak the wording, to clarify the process -- e.g. that we've approved it to add, but that it'll still need th

Hi David, Good timing: the BigScience Open RAIL-M License was just submitted for consideration a few days ago. [1] The license inclusion principles [2] contemplate that licenses to be added to the lis

I'd mostly echo Gary's comments here. #1 is the option that enables someone to be sure that the ID they're using should validate with then-current tooling. #2 is workable for folks who don't care abou

Jilayne -- yes, I'd be open to a lighter-weight or streamlined approach to approving licenses submitted from use in distros such as Debian and Fedora. In these cases we have greater confidence that th

Hi all, just a quick reminder that the SPDX Legal Team call will be starting shortly. We'll be focusing on the following topics: * quick look at #1603 - x11vnc-openssl-exception * discuss release proc

Hi all, Sending a quick reminder that the SPDX Legal Team call will be starting shortly (at the top of the hour). We'll be focusing on the open documentation tasks for 3.19, to confirm on who is takin

Hi Peter, Thanks for raising this (and glad the license templates have been useful for you!) Your email is timely, as we actually discussed a related point (though not specific to CC-BY-4.0) during th

Hi all, We're cancelling the SPDX legal team call for tomorrow, Nov. 24 due to the US holiday. Looking forward to picking up again in December. If you have some spare time and just can't get enough li

Hello all, The version 3.19 release of the license list is now tagged and live at https://spdx.org/licenses. 5 new licenses / exceptions were added to the list: 1. checkmk 2. FSFULLRWD 3. Knuth-CTAN 4

SPDX Legal Team - 2nd Thursdays 2023 https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting WhenMonthly from 12pm to 1pm on the second Thursday from Thursday Jan 12 to Monday Jan 1,

SPDX Legal Team - 4th Thursdays 2023 https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting WhenMonthly from 12pm to 1pm on the fourth Thursday from Thursday Jan 26 to Monday Jan 1,