Re: PIBS License Identifier
Jilayne Lovejoy <lovejoylids@...>
Hello Wolfgang,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We are adding this license to the about-to-be-released version 1.19 of the SPDX License LIst and I had a couple things I wanted to share with you. 1) it was suggested to use the short identifier: "ibm-pibs" - do you have any objection to "IBM-pibs"? The reason being that all other SPDX License List short identifiers tend towards using capital letters unless spelling a word. I'd prefer to be consistent to this end, but it's not a major sticking point either way (in other words, if you are already using the all-lower-case short identifier, I don't see why we can't adopt that to the SPDX License List - if anyone on the Legal Team disagrees with me, please speak up) 2) in regards to the two different copyright dates you mentioned below (2002 and 1995) - I have compared the actual text of the 2002 version you listed in this email and the 1995 version you provided links to in a subsequent email and the only difference is the date itself. In this case, the SPDX License List matching guidelines would equate these two license as the same, as this is only a copyright notice year difference, not a difference in the substantive text of the license. If you could get back to me as to the first item as soon as possible, that would be great. Cheers, Jilayne Lovejoy SPDX Legal Team lead On Jul 28, 2013, at 8:23 AM, Wolfgang Denk <wd@...> wrote:
Hello, |
|