Re: "X.org Preferred License"
Thanks, and I see it’s already done. Now I need to see why my tool isn’t matching it.
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 12:47 PM
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>; Atwood, Mark <atwoodm@...>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
The MIT license template on the license list  has the language "(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that part shows up in blue italics on the list .
I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing something.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org <atwoodm=amazon.com@...> wrote:
The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT. I've not yet dug in deeper,
Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
Mark Atwood <atwoodm@...>
Principal, Open Source