spdx@lists.spdx.org

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Messages

Between

and

None would imply that one looked and none was found. Absence of the field would not imply whether there was or was not any license information in the file. For example, if someone wanted to use the

By Peterson, Scott K (HP Legal) <scott.k.peterson@...> · #271 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

I assumed we'd want to distinguish between "I didn't look" and "I looked and found no license info." L. Philip Odence Vice President of Business Development Black Duck Software, inc. 265 Winter

By Philip Odence · #270 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

Given that the field is optional do we need a "none" value? Wouldn't the absence of this field mean "none". <scott.k.peterson@...> wrote:

By Peter Williams <peter.williams@...> · #269 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

This all looks very good Scott. I think naming is really important. I suggest being even more explicit with the name of the field to avoid confusion all together and call it: "License Information in

By Philip Odence · #268 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

I have a revision to my proposal below. The file format should permit uses where no assertion about what licensing information is or is not explicitly present in the file. In those cases the field

By Peterson, Scott K (HP Legal) <scott.k.peterson@...> · #267 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

With the intent that I heard on the phone this morning, calling the second license field "Detected License" or "Declared License" will confuse people as to the intended meaning of the information in

By Peterson, Scott K (HP Legal) <scott.k.peterson@...> · #266 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

How are these different? In both cases it is the set of licenses the author(s) have declared/stated they believe (or want you to believe) cover the entity in question. Seems pretty much the same to

By Peter Williams <peter.williams@...> · #265 ·

Minutes from Jan 13 SPDX General Meeting

I've posted the minutes. The Tech Team has put in place an instance of Bugzilla. We'll be using it to track all kinds of SPDX issues including licenses, documentation and website issues. So, you may

By Philip Odence · #264 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

Soeren, First, you inferred the issue correctly. I was in the conversation and had exactly the same idea as you. I ended up never putting it out on the table because several of the participants in the

By Philip Odence · #263 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

Hi Scott, The meaning of the declared and detected at the package is different than what we've been discussing at the file level, and separation of the two different cases (package level vs. file

By kate.stewart@... · #262 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

[...] I haven't been in the spdx-team from the beginning on, so I do not exactly know what the original purpose of these two license declarations is. But judging from daily experience I assume it is

By Soeren_Rabenstein@... · #261 ·

Re: Licence abbreviations?

<Jlovejoy@...> wrote: A file that contains it. For example, this is the usage of the GPL-2.0+ (excerpted from a Bison file): usage is very different from the text of the license

By dmg · #260 ·

Re: Licence abbreviations?

What kind of example did you have in mind? Do you mean an example of a particular software package that uses a particular license? Sent from J's iPhone

By Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...> · #259 ·

Re: Licence abbreviations?

Thanks Jylayne, one thing that would be useful (for those of us wanting to identify the license of a file) is to have examples of the use of each license (not the license itself, but how it is used).

By dmg · #258 ·

Re: Licence abbreviations?

Daniel, The license list spreadsheet is located here: http://spdx.org/wiki/working-version-license-list The most recent version is 1.4 and will have a column with the short names therein. The

By Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...> · #257 ·

Licence abbreviations?

Hi Everybody, is there a place where the abbreviations (as to be used in the SPDX document) are listed? This page only lists the full names. http://www.spdx.org/licenses/ -- -- Daniel M. German

By dmg · #256 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

<scott.k.peterson@...> wrote: I don't know about this one. Would this statement be representable in a declared license file? It requires multiple facts and deduction based on those facts to

By Peter Williams <peter.williams@...> · #255 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

Kate and Peter -- I am trying to understand the meaning and value of "detected" and/or "declared" as distinguished from "your best guess", i.e., "asserted". What would be the value of the detected

By Peterson, Scott K (HP Legal) <scott.k.peterson@...> · #254 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

I think the concept is sound and, as Rockett says, consistent. Minor stuff: - I agree with Peter that we may want to tweak the names and the descriptions. - Description under Asserted still says

By Philip Odence · #253 ·

Re: Purpose of licensing info

Kate: Thank you for sending. Agree 100%. All: This issue has been a continually thought of all founders since the origins of SPDX. The below is consistent with the original intent of SPDX, and

By Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...> · #252 ·

1421 - 1440 of 1691

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms