~ J Lovejoy [2022-07-26 06:00 +0200]: Interesting question! I, too, am a bit confused of the various URLs. Asked the other way round: are there also stable links for older versions, e.g. a permalink f

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 th

~ Steve Winslow [2022-01-10 22:33 +0100]: Following up on Steve's proposal, I see many people agreeing on it, or at least shrugging. There has been a proposal by Alexios that would require a larger re

Steve, thank you so much for summarising the discussion, and the Legal Team for working on the topic. I regret that I did not join the call, but from what I see you basically got everything covered an

~ Steve Kilbane [2021-12-02 10:16 +0100]: I vaguely recall a discussion on how the Linux kernel project should deal with this if they want to replace the copyright notices (in all their variety, as Mi

~ Steve Winslow [2021-11-24 20:14 +0100]: IANAL, but my sentiments exactly. Of course I can patch a AGPL* license (plus copyright holder) on top of a file with `print("hello world")` being its only co

~ J Lovejoy [2021-07-28 17:34 +0200]: From my understanding, they did not want to treat LGPL-3.0 as an exception to GPL-3.0. So they turned down "GPL-3.0* WITH LGPL-3.0*". "GPL-3.0 AND LGPL-3.0" as we

Hi Jilayne, (Taking out -tech as per earlier request) ~ J Lovejoy [2021-07-28 16:36 +0200]: Yes, that was a suggestion made by Matija in the discussion we've had. It was turned down by FSF. We didn't

~ Alexios Zavras [2021-07-28 13:09 +0200]: OK, sorry for including them then. They added this as an additional format on the lgpl page (LGPL+GPL): https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html Best, M

Hi Philippe, (I mistyped the spdx-tech address, fixed here) ~ Philippe Ombredanne [2021-07-28 12:04 +0200]: The ticket in the reuse-tool is public, the discussions with FSF were private with John Sull

Hi all, In the scope of REUSE we've noticed [^1] that just providing LPGL-3.0* – as downloaded from SPDX – in a repo does not suffice as it requires its mother license, GPL-3.0*. LGPL could be seen as

Hi Warner, ~ Warner Losh [2021-04-02 19:03 +0200]: Thanks @Sebastian for bringing up REUSE! Indeed, I concur that it's a worthy goal for FreeBSD. It reminds me a bit of KDE's story. The project also a

~ Gary O'Neall [2020-07-28 02:41 +0200]: Thank you! I've opened a Pull Request, but it only touches Annex E. I wondered whether we also have to clarify other snippet specifics in snippet-information.m

Hi all, At REUSE, we found some time to wrap our brains around this issue again. ~ Gary O'Neall [2020-06-05 19:58 +0200]: Thanks for the suggestions. I think what we need is a consensus on 1. how to m

Hi all, At REUSE, we currently discuss how to correctly handling snippets from a third party, potentially under a different license [^1]. Since we strive to make as much use of SPDX as possible, I won

~ Kate Stewart [2020-05-07 03:37 +0200]: Same goes for GPL-2.0 and the like. That's understandable, and a reasonable workflow. Is there any schedule for the completion of the addition of license ident

Hi Michael, ~ michael.kaelbling@... [2020-03-09 10:45 +0100]: Actually, that's one of the two options REUSE suggests: * Add a copyright and licensing header anyway * Use CC0-1.0 as a license t

Dear all, Perhaps you've seen it already, but I'd like to make you aware of the newest version of REUSE which contains many exciting improvements. For example, we make use of the SPDX-FileCopyrightTex