Date   

ANNOUNCE: #spdx channel on Freenode IRC server, now available. #spdx

Kate Stewart <kate.stewart@...>
 

Hi,
Have just finished setting up a #spdx IRC channel on freenode, to be
used for ongoing SPDX project communication and collaboration.
Was just going to send this to the tech list, but realized its more
generally useful, as well. So, apologies for the multiple copies of
this message in some of your in boxes.

Its hoped that this will provide a useful resource for more informal
discussion on the SPDX project (specification, tools, guidelines for
usage, etc.). Guidelines for how to use the channel can be found:
http://freenode.net/channel_guidelines.shtml

For those unfamiliar with using IRC communication, you can access
freenode and the #spdx channel through a web interface, if you don't
have an IRC client installed on your system.

Go to: http://webchat.freenode.net/

Nickname: choose a nickname so folks know who is talking.
Channels: #spdx
enter in the reCAPTCHA in the space provided
then press Connect --> and that should let you start participating.

I've added #spdx to the list of channels I monitor daily, so if you
want to ask me a quick question, IRC channels are a good place for that
sort of thing. You may also find them useful for collaborating with
other members on specific projects.

Hope you find this useful,
Kate


SPDX General Meeting Reminder/Agenda - Note extended business agenda

Philip Odence
 

After quick reports from the Tech and Legal teams, we'll spend a little more time on the business agenda to focus on items that need to be completed before the Aug 17 release.

Meeting Time: June 30, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 15:00 UTC. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html

Conf call dial-in:
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of toll free numbers can be found: 
https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNumber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF

 
Administrative Agenda
Attendance
Technical Team Report - Kate

Legal Team Report - Rockett/Karen

Business Team Report - Kim
Faqs- get a status update Web site - assign areas for content Pr - talk re quotes

Cross Functional Issues – Discussion


Updated specification available - draft 20110727

kate.stewart@...
 

Hi,
Updated version of the specification, incorporating the feedback received
is now posted on the SPDX site an http://www.spdx.org/spec/current.

Would very much appreciate those who have been making suggestions/bug
fixes/etc. over the last month could take a pass through it, and make sure I've
incorporated your feedback.

There's still a bit of format polishing and wordsmithing left to do, and
some diagrams/license lists to update, so its still a work in progress.


Thanks!

Kate


Re: CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

guillaume.rousseau@antelink.com
 

We will attend OWF 2011 too.
Guillaume

Le 18/07/11 18:28, Kim Weins a écrit :
That would be great since I won't be there this year.

Kim


On Mon 7/18/11 10:17 AM, "Michael J Herzog"<mjherzog@...> wrote:

Martin,

Philippe is planning to go to OWF so he can give the SPDX talk this time.

Regards, Michael

Michael J. Herzog
+1 650 380 0680 | mjherzog_at_nexB.com
nexB [Open by Design] http://www.nexb.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail (including attachments) may contain
information that is proprietary or confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient or a person responsible for its delivery to the intended recipient,
do not copy or distribute it. Please permanently delete the e-mail and any
attachments, and notify us immediately at (650) 380-0680.


On 7/18/2011 6:49 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I'm organizing a legal/licensing track at Open World Forum (September
22-24, Paris). It would be great to have a talk about SPDX. Kim,
are you planning to attend OWF again and interested in giving an
update on SPDX? If not, anyone else interested?

CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Licensing is an important component of every free software and open
source project. This is especially true as an increasing number of
corporations are adopting and distributing open source applications and
code. This track considers various legal and licensing aspects of open
source, both from a community and a corporate perspective.

This track is a great opportunity for you to discuss legal and licensing
aspects of open source with lawyers, decision makers, open source
developers and other people who are interested in legal aspects of open
source.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of topics we would like to cover:

- Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (e.g. Harmony)
- Standards for exchanging license data (e.g. SPDX)
- Open source licensing in the cloud (e.g. AGPL; open source in Javascript)
- Open source compliance (tools, processes, etc)
- Open source and patents
- Incorporating projects as non-profit organizations

Please send a title and an abstract (5-15 lines) of your talk, with a short
(5-10 lines) bio and the expected length of your talk (50 minutes for
longer talks, 25 minutes for short talks) to Martin Michlmayr at tbm@...

Final date for submission: August 7, 2011
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx
Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @openlogic


_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx
--
Guillaume ROUSSEAU
CEO, Co-Founder, Antelink
Président, Cofondateur, Antelink

18, rue Yves Toudic, 75010, Paris 10ème, France
http://www.antelink.com/
+33 1 42 39 30 78


Re: CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Kim Weins
 

That would be great since I won't be there this year.

Kim


On Mon 7/18/11 10:17 AM, "Michael J Herzog" <mjherzog@...> wrote:

Martin,

Philippe is planning to go to OWF so he can give the SPDX talk this time.

Regards, Michael

Michael J. Herzog
+1 650 380 0680 | mjherzog_at_nexB.com
nexB [Open by Design] http://www.nexb.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail (including attachments) may contain
information that is proprietary or confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient or a person responsible for its delivery to the intended recipient,
do not copy or distribute it. Please permanently delete the e-mail and any
attachments, and notify us immediately at (650) 380-0680.


On 7/18/2011 6:49 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I'm organizing a legal/licensing track at Open World Forum (September
22-24, Paris). It would be great to have a talk about SPDX. Kim,
are you planning to attend OWF again and interested in giving an
update on SPDX? If not, anyone else interested?

CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Licensing is an important component of every free software and open
source project. This is especially true as an increasing number of
corporations are adopting and distributing open source applications and
code. This track considers various legal and licensing aspects of open
source, both from a community and a corporate perspective.

This track is a great opportunity for you to discuss legal and licensing
aspects of open source with lawyers, decision makers, open source
developers and other people who are interested in legal aspects of open
source.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of topics we would like to cover:

- Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (e.g. Harmony)
- Standards for exchanging license data (e.g. SPDX)
- Open source licensing in the cloud (e.g. AGPL; open source in Javascript)
- Open source compliance (tools, processes, etc)
- Open source and patents
- Incorporating projects as non-profit organizations

Please send a title and an abstract (5-15 lines) of your talk, with a short
(5-10 lines) bio and the expected length of your talk (50 minutes for
longer talks, 25 minutes for short talks) to Martin Michlmayr at tbm@...

Final date for submission: August 7, 2011
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @openlogic


Re: CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Michael J Herzog <mjherzog@...>
 

Martin,

Philippe is planning to go to OWF so he can give the SPDX talk this time.

Regards, Michael

Michael J. Herzog
+1 650 380 0680 | mjherzog_at_nexB.com
nexB [Open by Design] http://www.nexb.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail (including attachments) may contain information that is proprietary or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for its delivery to the intended recipient, do not copy or distribute it. Please permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments, and notify us immediately at (650) 380-0680.

On 7/18/2011 6:49 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I'm organizing a legal/licensing track at Open World Forum (September
22-24, Paris). It would be great to have a talk about SPDX. Kim,
are you planning to attend OWF again and interested in giving an
update on SPDX? If not, anyone else interested?

CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Licensing is an important component of every free software and open
source project. This is especially true as an increasing number of
corporations are adopting and distributing open source applications and
code. This track considers various legal and licensing aspects of open
source, both from a community and a corporate perspective.

This track is a great opportunity for you to discuss legal and licensing
aspects of open source with lawyers, decision makers, open source
developers and other people who are interested in legal aspects of open
source.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of topics we would like to cover:

- Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (e.g. Harmony)
- Standards for exchanging license data (e.g. SPDX)
- Open source licensing in the cloud (e.g. AGPL; open source in Javascript)
- Open source compliance (tools, processes, etc)
- Open source and patents
- Incorporating projects as non-profit organizations

Please send a title and an abstract (5-15 lines) of your talk, with a short
(5-10 lines) bio and the expected length of your talk (50 minutes for
longer talks, 25 minutes for short talks) to Martin Michlmayr at tbm@...

Final date for submission: August 7, 2011


CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Martin Michlmayr
 

I'm organizing a legal/licensing track at Open World Forum (September
22-24, Paris). It would be great to have a talk about SPDX. Kim,
are you planning to attend OWF again and interested in giving an
update on SPDX? If not, anyone else interested?

CFP: Legal and Licensing Aspects of Open Source at OWF 2011

Licensing is an important component of every free software and open
source project. This is especially true as an increasing number of
corporations are adopting and distributing open source applications and
code. This track considers various legal and licensing aspects of open
source, both from a community and a corporate perspective.

This track is a great opportunity for you to discuss legal and licensing
aspects of open source with lawyers, decision makers, open source
developers and other people who are interested in legal aspects of open
source.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of topics we would like to cover:

- Contributor agreements and copyright assignment (e.g. Harmony)
- Standards for exchanging license data (e.g. SPDX)
- Open source licensing in the cloud (e.g. AGPL; open source in Javascript)
- Open source compliance (tools, processes, etc)
- Open source and patents
- Incorporating projects as non-profit organizations

Please send a title and an abstract (5-15 lines) of your talk, with a short
(5-10 lines) bio and the expected length of your talk (50 minutes for
longer talks, 25 minutes for short talks) to Martin Michlmayr at tbm@...

Final date for submission: August 7, 2011

--
Martin Michlmayr
Open Source Program Office, Hewlett-Packard


Re: Question on DRAFT 20110605 (package cardinality/verification)

Peter Williams <peter.williams@...>
 

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 6:18 AM, Mario Tokarz <mario@...> wrote:
Hi all,

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:34:10PM +0200 , Mario Tokarz wrote:
Hi all,

I have two questions regarding the latest spec from your home
page. Thanks in advance for the time and consideration.

1.) Page 10 states that "A package can contain subpackages". How would
those be added to the description, they do not seem to be part of the
data model as shown on pg 35.
I think that this would relate to Bug 818 - is this correct? If so,
the feature would not be part of release 1.0?
Your are correct. That feature is not planned for this release.

I would need to reread the spec, but if so the formulation could maybe
be improved there.
I think that would be an excellent approach handling this. Any
suggestions for a new formulation would be greatly appreciated.

Peter
openlogic.com


Re: Question on DRAFT 20110605 (package cardinality/verification)

Mario Tokarz <mario@...>
 

Hi all,

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:34:10PM +0200 , Mario Tokarz wrote:
Hi all,

I have two questions regarding the latest spec from your home
page. Thanks in advance for the time and consideration.

1.) Page 10 states that "A package can contain subpackages". How would
those be added to the description, they do not seem to be part of the
data model as shown on pg 35.
I think that this would relate to Bug 818 - is this correct? If so,
the feature would not be part of release 1.0?

I would need to reread the spec, but if so the formulation could maybe
be improved there.

Supporting subpackages with a full set of metadata seems to be a good
approach to support descriptions of a full system image.
Thx,
Mario



--
BMW Car IT GmbH
http://www.bmw-carit.de


Agenda for today's SPDX General Meeting

Philip Odence
 

Meeting Time: June 30, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 15:00 UTC. http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html

Conf call dial-in:
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of toll free numbers can be found: 
https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNumber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF

 
Administrative Agenda
Attendance
Technical Team Report - Kate

Business Team Report - Kim

Legal Team Report - Rockett/Karen


Cross Functional Issues – Discussion
LinuxCon attendance, plan, booth
Website update- Kirsten/Pierre/Steve


Open Action Items

  • MartinM- Report back on # of people on respective mailing lists. ONGOING
    Kim -- share Biz Team proposed process for adding licenses to SPDX list more broadly
    Michael H. -- Posting BOM info
    Kim- Creating FAQ strucdture and handing out pieces for review, cleanup, additions


Microsoft Windows Rally Development Kit License Agreement

Armijn Hemel <armijn@...>
 

hi all,

I have encountered the Microsoft Windows Rally Development Kit License Agreement quite a few times in GPL tarballs.

Strictly speaking this is not an open source license at all, but source code that is using the license has ended up in many devices and the packages have often been labelled as 'GPL'.

An example of it can be found here:

http://svn.dd-wrt.com:8000/browser//src/router/lltd/osl-linux.c?rev=16674

armijn

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
armijn@... || http://www.gpl-violations.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Canceled Event: SPDX Legal Workstream Call 11ET/10CT/8PT @ Wed Jul 13 8am - 9am (spdx@fossbazaar.org)

Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...>
 

This event has been canceled and removed from your calendar.

SPDX Legal Workstream Call 11ET/10CT/8PT

All:

Re-sending invite for regular bi-weekly SPDX Legal Workstream call.

Many thanks,

Rockett

Motorola Inc.
E.A. Rockett
Senior Counsel
Software, Applications &
Digital Content Licensing
(408)541-6703 (O)
(408)541-6900 (F)
(415)508-7625 (M)
rockett@...

When
Wed Jul 13 8am – 9am Pacific Time
Where
Conference Bridge 1.877.825.8522 PIN:0376146 (map)
Calendar
spdx@...
Who
Esteban Rockett - organizer

Invitation from Google Calendar

You are receiving this courtesy email at the account spdx@... because you are an attendee of this event.

To stop receiving future notifications for this event, decline this event. Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for your entire calendar.


[Update] SPDX Legal Workstream Call 11ET/10CT/8PT

mgia3940@motorola.com <mgia3940@...>
 

All:

The meeting with the "un-named concerned parties" regarding the "Author" and "Reviewer" fields (in the SPDX Specification) has not occurred yet (due to logistics). Since today's meeting was to discuss feedback from the above-mentioned meeting with the "un-named concerned parties", I am cancelling today's call to respect everyone' time.

We will reconvene in 2 weeks, at the normal time and slot.

Many thanks,

Rockett


Re: Ninka, and SPDX On the linux kernel and BSD licenses

dmg
 

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Kate Stewart
<kate.stewart@...> wrote:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.

instead of:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
One more:


Neither the names of the copyright holders nor the names of its
contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
this software without specific prior written permission.

vs

Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its
contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
this software without specific prior written permission.




--
--dmg

---
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org


Re: Ninka, and SPDX On the linux kernel and BSD licenses

dmg
 

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Kate Stewart
<kate.stewart@...> wrote:
Hi Daniel,
  Lets move this thread to the SPDX legal subgroup discussion list.
Since I think we'll need them to comment on the issues.   To my eyes,
yes those sentence fragments look basically equivalent,  and we need
to figure out a way to abstract these options, but I'm not a lawyer.  :)

 Thanks, Kate
I am not in that mailing list.

It would be of great help if somebody help me with the analysis of the
non-matching license files,
while I concentrate on adding SPDX licenses to ninka.

--dmg


On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 03:40 -0700, D M German wrote:
Hi Everybody,

I started implementing SPDX licenses in Ninka. I started with the BSDs
(4, 3 and 2).

My goal is to try to 'SPDX' the kernel before LinuxCon. Of the files
that Ninka is properly identifying their license, there are many with
other variants of the BSD:


----------------------------------------------------------------------
     71 BSD3
     37 spdxBSD2
     13 spdxBSD3
      8 GPLv2,BSD3
      8 GPLv2+,spdxBSD2
      5 BSD2EndorseInsteadOfBinary
      3 GPLv2,BSD3NoWarranty
      2 spdxBSD4
      2 SeeFile,BSD3
      2 BSDOnlyEndorseNoWarranty
      1 GPLv2+,spdxBSD3
      1 GPLv2+,BSD3
      1 GPLv2+,BSD2var2
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is an example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c

The sentence that does not match the SPDX version is:

Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

instead of:

Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
Possibly just remove "the" from matching text?

Neither the name of <ORGANIZATION> nor...  is what the text could read,
not sure "the" is adding to the semantics.


Here is another example  of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c

This is the sentence that does not match:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.

instead of:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
Good question.   ???

Kate



--
--dmg

---
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org


Re: Ninka, and SPDX On the linux kernel and BSD licenses

Kim Weins
 

Daniel

These seem like examples of the things we may want to "templatize" in the
standard licenses. Those efforts have been delayed behind other items. The
legal team can speak to these specific issues of whether we would consider
them equivalent.

Kim



On Tue 7/12/11 4:40 AM, "D M German" <dmg@...> wrote:


Hi Everybody,

I started implementing SPDX licenses in Ninka. I started with the BSDs
(4, 3 and 2).

My goal is to try to 'SPDX' the kernel before LinuxCon. Of the files
that Ninka is properly identifying their license, there are many with
other variants of the BSD:


----------------------------------------------------------------------
71 BSD3
37 spdxBSD2
13 spdxBSD3
8 GPLv2,BSD3
8 GPLv2+,spdxBSD2
5 BSD2EndorseInsteadOfBinary
3 GPLv2,BSD3NoWarranty
2 spdxBSD4
2 SeeFile,BSD3
2 BSDOnlyEndorseNoWarranty
1 GPLv2+,spdxBSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD2var2
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is an example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c

The sentence that does not match the SPDX version is:

Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors may be
used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without
specific prior written permission.

instead of:

Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may
be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without
specific prior written permission.


Here is another example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c

This is the sentence that does not match:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.

instead of:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS"
AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
DISCLAIMED.



--
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org/
http://silvernegative.com/
dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca
replace (at) with @ and (dot) with .
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @openlogic


Re: Ninka, and SPDX On the linux kernel and BSD licenses

Kate Stewart <kate.stewart@...>
 

Hi Daniel,
Lets move this thread to the SPDX legal subgroup discussion list.
Since I think we'll need them to comment on the issues. To my eyes,
yes those sentence fragments look basically equivalent, and we need
to figure out a way to abstract these options, but I'm not a lawyer. :)

Thanks, Kate

On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 03:40 -0700, D M German wrote:
Hi Everybody,

I started implementing SPDX licenses in Ninka. I started with the BSDs
(4, 3 and 2).

My goal is to try to 'SPDX' the kernel before LinuxCon. Of the files
that Ninka is properly identifying their license, there are many with
other variants of the BSD:


----------------------------------------------------------------------
71 BSD3
37 spdxBSD2
13 spdxBSD3
8 GPLv2,BSD3
8 GPLv2+,spdxBSD2
5 BSD2EndorseInsteadOfBinary
3 GPLv2,BSD3NoWarranty
2 spdxBSD4
2 SeeFile,BSD3
2 BSDOnlyEndorseNoWarranty
1 GPLv2+,spdxBSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD2var2
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is an example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c

The sentence that does not match the SPDX version is:

Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

instead of:

Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
Possibly just remove "the" from matching text?

Neither the name of <ORGANIZATION> nor... is what the text could read,
not sure "the" is adding to the semantics.


Here is another example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c

This is the sentence that does not match:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.

instead of:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
Good question. ???

Kate


Ninka, and SPDX On the linux kernel and BSD licenses

dmg
 

Hi Everybody,

I started implementing SPDX licenses in Ninka. I started with the BSDs
(4, 3 and 2).

My goal is to try to 'SPDX' the kernel before LinuxCon. Of the files
that Ninka is properly identifying their license, there are many with
other variants of the BSD:


----------------------------------------------------------------------
71 BSD3
37 spdxBSD2
13 spdxBSD3
8 GPLv2,BSD3
8 GPLv2+,spdxBSD2
5 BSD2EndorseInsteadOfBinary
3 GPLv2,BSD3NoWarranty
2 spdxBSD4
2 SeeFile,BSD3
2 BSDOnlyEndorseNoWarranty
1 GPLv2+,spdxBSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD3
1 GPLv2+,BSD2var2
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is an example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/usb-tx.c

The sentence that does not match the SPDX version is:

Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

instead of:

Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.


Here is another example of the BSD3 (non-spdx):

./fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c

This is the sentence that does not match:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.

instead of:

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.



--
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org/
http://silvernegative.com/
dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca
replace (at) with @ and (dot) with .


Re: updating Ninka to output SPDX licenses

Jilayne Lovejoy <jilayne.lovejoy@...>
 

I would say, yes.

Jilayne

On 7/11/11 4:39 PM, "Daniel M. German" <dmg@...> wrote:


I have a question regarding when text matches a license. I am curious
how should I interpret optional quotes around some text.

In particular, the BSD-4 includes this text:

This product includes software developed by the <organization>.

Would this text be equivalent:

``This product includes software developed by the <organization>.''

or

"This product includes software developed by the <organization>."


updating Ninka to output SPDX licenses

dmg
 

I have a question regarding when text matches a license. I am curious
how should I interpret optional quotes around some text.

In particular, the BSD-4 includes this text:

This product includes software developed by the <organization>.

Would this text be equivalent:

``This product includes software developed by the <organization>.''

or

"This product includes software developed by the <organization>."



--
--
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org/
http://silvernegative.com/
dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca
replace (at) with @ and (dot) with .

1161 - 1180 of 1604