Greetings all, The SPDX spec version 2.3 is now available for review at https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3-RC1/. A summary of the changes can be found in the SPEC Annex I. If you identify any issue

Hi all, Just a quick reminder that the SPDX-legal call will be at the top of the hour. We'll focus on what tasks can be completed for the next release and, if there's time, I have an update on Fedora

Hot off the press! Link to blog post of this here: https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/important-changes-to-software-license-information-in-fedora-packages-spdx-and-more/ Thanks for the support on

Hi all, I just went through all the issue in terms of what we can likely get in for the 3.18 release. Seems like most issues are already assigned to Steve or I :) Could someone pick up this one and pr

Hi all, On our call a few days ago, Steve raised the idea of using the next release to JUST focus on documentation improvements. There haven’t been a ton of new license requests and some of the docume

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

I've thought some more about certain unintended problems some of us were previously discussing regarding the use of SPDX-License-Identifier: in source files. In particular it's occurred to me that the

Hi all, Just a last minute reminder of our regular call today at the top of the hour. As mentioned previously, for the next release cycle (through end of Sept) we are going to focus on updating and im

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 SPDX-legal, I have raised this a couple times in the past few months or so, but now that it is more of a "ripe" topic, I wanted to get some input on preliminary ideas: Background: Fedora has now of

Hi all, As per our “documentation release” - we are aiming to review licenses that don’t need legal discussion via Github issues. As per our guidance on license review, if "3 SPDX-legal team members (

In Fedora a license has been submitted for review that seems to match HPND-sell-variant except that the word "appears" in HPND-sell-variant is "appear" in this license. https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal

Dear all, I have good news! I've been able to create a CI workflow which responds to accepted license requests on GitHub automatically, letting everyone know that the license won't be visible on the w

Hi all, As per our discussion on our call going through updates to the online license submission tool, I was going to make an issue summarizing the proposed changes. Instead, I got inspired that I mig

Dear SPDX community, As mentioned on a couple of the general calls some time ago, the Steering Committee has been working on a Change Proposal template and process to facilitate communication, priorit

Hi again, Now that 2.3 is out, this question is more pertinent: Note, if I want to link to a specific part of the SPDX spec, I can find it via the HTML format, for example: https://spdx.github.io/spdx

Just out of curiosity, has SPDX been requested to or considered assigning identifiers to artificial intelligence software licenses? I ran across the Stable Diffusion README, which contains the followi

Hi all, From our last call, the subject of 'when can people start using short ids? ‘ came up. This has been asked before on individual license submissions and we have answered informally, but it might

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, I just made a new issue to capture this, but wanted to raise it here for broader discussion. If we say that all OSI-approved are included on the SPDX License List, would we want to extend this