Hello All, I am getting up to speed, have taken a close look at the current spec, and have some comments noted below. 3.4 Download URL COMMENT: We may want to have some guideline as to which

Hi, Following up from last week and from SPDX call today, we'll be having a special topic call tomorrow on the licenses. Here's the dial in information for the call tomorrow: US

All: as discussed during today's call here are some pointers to Launchpad RDF: This is an example of a project page: https://launchpad.net/do and the matching RDF

Issue: Not clear how to include SPDX author commentsto the consumers of the SPDX file. For example, a SPDX author may like toinclude a disclaimer, assumptions made, context of the analysis performed

Meeting Time: Sept 23, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 15:00 UTC Conf call dial-in: Conference code: 7812589502 Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada): (877) 435-0230 International dial-in

Colleagues, Those interested in participating in the RDF track, please reconvene next Tuesday. Among other hot topics, we'd like to review in more detail the relationship between SPDX and other

Hello Everyone, The SPDX team is hard at work on completing the spec and nailing down all of the license details. To make sure we are successful in getting SPDX accepted and adopted, we are working

The main problem is that these terms are not really context free. If you see: "This (program|library|software) is (release|made available) under the GPL version 2", you will all probably agree

I agree, distribute and make available have very different legal implications. I also believe that licensed and released are not equivalent to distribute Please consider the environment before

I agree with Tom’s comment– some of these are defined terms within the license itself (e.g. in GPL3.0, “The Program” has a specific definition), so we should becareful about making these terms

HiDan, Regardingthe equivalent terms. I have seen different commercial legal interpretationsbased on two of the sets of "equivalent" terms below. I believethat these need to be distinct. With

Posix regular expressions. Yes, (s)? means that sometimes the s is not there. -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org

The ? notation in the template, does it mean that what preceeds in brackets is optional. ie. (s)? means that the s could or could not appear? Kate

Kim asked about Ninka. It is our license identification tool. It is really a research prototype, but it works. It is particularly good at not making mistakes, at the expense if not identifying the

First, some common equivalent words/phrases: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- license|licence distributable|licensed|released|made available can|may terms and

This should have gone out sooner so we may want to reschedule to ensure better attendance. I propose to have a quick call for those who are expecting it. For those who this note is catching off

Hi Armijn, Thanks for working through the spec, and finding the typo. ;) All updates and corrections much appreciated. In terms of the requirements, as more technical folk have started

hi all, I read the specs and saw: 1.6. Format Requirements: 1.6.1. Must be in a human readable form. 1.6.2. Must be in a syntax that a software tool can read and write. In my experience

GMT is an old term and UTC is the new black. The good thing about UTC is that it does not change, no matter how many timezones the UK skips in summer (there used to be this thing called "double summer

Bill Schineller said on Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 03:33:46PM -0400: Sorry, I won't be able to attend this session, being at a customer site for a Workshop. Bruno. -- Open Source & Linux Profession Lead