call today!
|
J Lovejoy
Please note this is the correct dial-in info:
Call this number: (United States): +1-857-216-2871 User PIN: 38633 International: visit the URL at http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam Agenda items as follows: 1) Dennis drafted some text for defining "deprecation" to be included at the top of the list of deprecated licenses, please review here: Release 2.0 of the SPDX Specification introduces license expression syntax that supports the ability to identify common variations on standard licenses without the need to define each potential variation as a distinct license on the SPDX License List. This new syntax supports the ability to use a simple “+” operator after a license short identifier to indicate “or later version” (e.g. GPL-2.0+), and it also supports the ability to declare a standard license exception using the “WITH” operator (e.g. GPL-2.0+ WITH Autoconf-exception-2.0). SPDX has defined a list of standard License Exceptions to use after the “WITH” operator. A number of the standard License Exceptions were formerly included in the standard SPDX License List, but they have been deprecated as licenses, and correct usage employs the new license expression syntax. Note that for compatibility, the URL to each deprecated license still exists, but links to those deprecated licenses have been removed from the standard License List in order to clarify the currently recommended syntax. 2) license expression syntax FAQs (Mark) - please review: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/LicenseExpressionFAQ - for review and feedback 3) examples for license expression syntax on wiki page: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/FileNoticeExamples - for review and feedback Thanks, Jilayne & Paul
SPDX Legal Team co-lead
|
|
|
|
I’m glad to see the new expression syntax, including “+”, “with”, “and”, “or”, and “;”. Big improvement.
However, I suggest NOT requiring that expressions be surrounded with parentheses when there is no ambiguity (e.g., a single list of “and” or “or” at the top level). All the examples http://wiki.spdx.org/view/FileNoticeExamples include parentheses even in cases like “(GPL-2.0+ WITH Bison-Exception)”, which is more annoying for humans to type. By all means support parens, just make them optional in such cases.
Thanks.
--- David A. Wheeler
From: spdx-legal-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces@...] On Behalf Of J Lovejoy
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 12:44 PM To: SPDX-legal Subject: call today!
Please note this is the correct dial-in info:
Call this number: (United States): +1-857-216-2871 User PIN: 38633 International: visit the URL at http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam
Agenda items as follows: 1) Dennis drafted some text for defining "deprecation" to be included at the top of the list of deprecated licenses, please review here: Release 2.0 of the SPDX Specification introduces license expression syntax that supports the ability to identify common variations on standard licenses without the need to define each potential variation as a distinct license on the SPDX License List. This new syntax supports the ability to use a simple “+” operator after a license short identifier to indicate “or later version” (e.g. GPL-2.0+), and it also supports the ability to declare a standard license exception using the “WITH” operator (e.g. GPL-2.0+ WITH Autoconf-exception-2.0). SPDX has defined a list of standard License Exceptions to use after the “WITH” operator. A number of the standard License Exceptions were formerly included in the standard SPDX License List, but they have been deprecated as licenses, and correct usage employs the new license expression syntax. Note that for compatibility, the URL to each deprecated license still exists, but links to those deprecated licenses have been removed from the standard License List in order to clarify the currently recommended syntax. 2) license expression syntax FAQs (Mark) - please review: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/LicenseExpressionFAQ - for review and feedback 3) examples for license expression syntax on wiki page: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/FileNoticeExamples - for review and feedback
Thanks, Jilayne & Paul SPDX Legal Team co-lead
|
|
|
|
Tom Vidal <TVidal@...>
I'm unavailable today. In client meetings in Scottsdale. Have a good meeting. * * * * * * * * * * * * Thomas H. Vidal, Esq. Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP 5900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2250 Los Angeles, CA 90036 Direct Dial: 310.300.2950 | Facsimile:310.300.2901 tvidal@... |www.twitter.com/thomasvidal www.linkedin.com/in/thomashvidal On Dec 11, 2014, at 10:43 AM, J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Mark Gisi
Hi David,
Thank you for the feedback. You highlighted an important point. Outer parentheses was a requirement added by the tech team to support tool parsing but it is not required for human presentation of the data. A tool can always display (or receive as input) a license expression without the outer parentheses. However, any tool creating (or reading) an SPDX file should expect to include (or parse for) the outer parentheses. Although less common, if a human was to manually create or read a raw SPDX file (i.e., without the assistance of a tool) they would be required to include or expect the outer parentheses.
We will incorporate your feedback by noting this distinction in the License Express Syntax FAQs and examples. If time permits I will see if we can also clarify this distinction in the 2.0 spec as well.
Thanks, - Mark
Mark Gisi | Wind River | Senior Intellectual Property Manager Tel (510) 749-2016 | Fax (510) 749-4552
From: spdx-legal-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Wheeler, David A
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 9:55 AM To: J Lovejoy; SPDX-legal Subject: RE: call today!
I’m glad to see the new expression syntax, including “+”, “with”, “and”, “or”, and “;”. Big improvement.
However, I suggest NOT requiring that expressions be surrounded with parentheses when there is no ambiguity (e.g., a single list of “and” or “or” at the top level). All the examples http://wiki.spdx.org/view/FileNoticeExamples include parentheses even in cases like “(GPL-2.0+ WITH Bison-Exception)”, which is more annoying for humans to type. By all means support parens, just make them optional in such cases.
Thanks.
--- David A. Wheeler
From:
spdx-legal-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of J Lovejoy
Please note this is the correct dial-in info:
Call this number: (United States): +1-857-216-2871
User PIN: 38633
International: visit the URL at http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam
Agenda items as follows: 1) Dennis drafted some text for defining "deprecation" to be included at the top of the list of deprecated licenses, please review here: Release 2.0 of the SPDX Specification introduces license expression syntax that supports the ability to identify common variations on standard licenses without the need to define each potential variation as a distinct license on the SPDX License List. This new syntax supports the ability to use a simple “+” operator after a license short identifier to indicate “or later version” (e.g. GPL-2.0+), and it also supports the ability to declare a standard license exception using the “WITH” operator (e.g. GPL-2.0+ WITH Autoconf-exception-2.0). SPDX has defined a list of standard License Exceptions to use after the “WITH” operator. A number of the standard License Exceptions were formerly included in the standard SPDX License List, but they have been deprecated as licenses, and correct usage employs the new license expression syntax. Note that for compatibility, the URL to each deprecated license still exists, but links to those deprecated licenses have been removed from the standard License List in order to clarify the currently recommended syntax. 2) license expression syntax FAQs (Mark) - please review: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/LicenseExpressionFAQ - for review and feedback 3) examples for license expression syntax on wiki page: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/FileNoticeExamples - for review and feedback
Thanks, Jilayne & Paul SPDX Legal Team co-lead
|
|
|