Date
1 - 2 of 2
licenses to review for submission
|
J Lovejoy
Hi all,
In light of our discussion on our last call about how to make it easier and faster to get licenses reviewed (and adhere to our 3 “votes” from spdx-legal members for a license to be included), I’m sending a list of license submission issues that have at least one person reviewed below - please have a look and add your thoughts! https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1706 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1614 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1612 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1611 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1606 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1550 (analysis done for this one and is similar to #1551, so view together) https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1551 Note - not all of these used the license submission template. Relatedly, I used the new version of that on a couple and although the check boxes are an improvement, I still find it a bit clunky and slow. I am not sure if this is a biased view b/c I have so much historical knowledge, but I do think some of the factors are sort of “n/a” in some cases and you know that from the initial submission. That being said, I’m not sure I have any good ideas as to how to make it shorter or faster… yet…. Thanks! Jilayne |
|
|
|
J Lovejoy
Hi all,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
As per our license review protocol, we need 3 SPDX-legal team members to agree to add a license (not counting the submitter). Can we get more people to weigh in on these: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1608 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1652 these need 1 more person to weigh in: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1614 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1612 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1611 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1606 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1550 (analysis done for this one and is similar to #1551, so view together) https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1551 Thanks! Jilayne On 11/15/22 3:51 PM, J Lovejoy wrote:
Hi all, In light of our discussion on our last call about how to make it easier and faster to get licenses reviewed (and adhere to our 3 “votes” from spdx-legal members for a license to be included), I’m sending a list of license submission issues that have at least one person reviewed below - please have a look and add your thoughts! https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1706 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1614 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1612 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1611 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1606 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1550 (analysis done for this one and is similar to #1551, so view together) https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1551 Note - not all of these used the license submission template. Relatedly, I used the new version of that on a couple and although the check boxes are an improvement, I still find it a bit clunky and slow. I am not sure if this is a biased view b/c I have so much historical knowledge, but I do think some of the factors are sort of “n/a” in some cases and you know that from the initial submission. That being said, I’m not sure I have any good ideas as to how to make it shorter or faster… yet…. Thanks! Jilayne |
|
|