Re: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"
|
Manbeck, Jack
I agree. I’m surprised someone didn’t recognize EPL (or even EDL which we probably need to add….). Could be they were not familiar with Eclipse?
Jack
From: spdx-tech-bounces@...
[mailto:spdx-tech-bounces@...] On Behalf Of
Brian Fox
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:19 PM To: Tom Incorvia Cc: spdx-tech@...; spdx-legal@...; SPDX Subject: Re: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"
In my circles it's more common to refer to it as EPL instead of Eclipse. In fact even the Eclipse foundation refers to it as EPL: http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Tom Incorvia <tom.incorvia@...> wrote: Hello SPDX license list interested parties,
I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”.
I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to.
Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost).
Any concerns?
Thanks,
Tom
This message has been scanned by MailController.
|
|
|