Re: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse PublicLicense 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"


villalu@...
 

For what it is worth, my experience is that people affiliated with Eclipse in some way refer to it as EPL, but that "casual" people who come across it in another context (e.g., commonly in diligence) don't use the acronym, and instead refer to it as the Eclipse license or something along those lines.


If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster@..., and do not use or disseminate such information.  Pursuant to IRS Circular 230, any tax advice in this email may not be used to avoid tax penalties or to promote, market or recommend any matter herein.


From: spdx-legal-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-legal-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:16 PM
To: 'Tom Incorvia'; spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@...
Cc: 'SPDX'
Subject: RE: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse PublicLicense 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"

Tom,

 

FWIW, It is certainly news to me that people refer to the EPL as "Eclipse". I have universally heard it referred to as the EPL. I have literally never heard it referred to as Eclipse.

 

I don't have a strong feeling about this one way or another. I just find it surprising that my experience is so contrary to yours.

 

Mike Milinkovich

Executive Director

Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228

Mobile: +1.613.220.3223

mike.milinkovich@...

blog: http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mike/

twitter: @mmilinkov

 

 

 

 

From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Tom Incorvia
Sent: February-29-12 4:00 PM
To: spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@...
Cc: SPDX
Subject: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"

 

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

 

Tom Incorvia

tom.incorvia@...

Direct:  (512) 340-1336

Mobile: (408) 499 6850

Shoretel (Internal): 27015

This message has been scanned by MailController.

 


Join spdx@lists.spdx.org to automatically receive all group messages.