Hi Everyone, I just got back from europe. Please give me a couple days to catch up on my email and I will reply early next week. Ibrahim

To chime in on this, at openSUSE we have exactly the problem described above - we'd like to adopt SPDX, but the license list does not provide anywhere need the coverage that we need. What we've done

Jilayne Lovejoy wrote at 20:01 (EDT) on Thursday: I agree that trying everywhere makes sense for what Michel is trying to do, since, as others have pointed out, there's no clear venue for

In so far as Phil and Michael's previous comment regarding the SPDX License List – it is correct to say that we have endeavored to include the most common open source licenses (not freeware,

I could not agree more. Rest assured, this has been discussed and there was very vociferous and unanimous agreement that the short identifiers should not change once created. So far, I believe we

How about "Possibly Licensed Unpaid Software" - PLUS ?! Then we can have FOSSPLUS :)

How about: "Possibly, Might-be free Software" (PMS) :) -Debbie

None of this expression is covering proprietary software delivered free of cost but with an EULA, except the last one but it is not very accurate Michel.Ruffin@..., PhD Software

PDC- Public Domain Code? PAS- Publicly Accessible Software CAS- Community Accessible Software? GAC- Generally Accessible Code?

RMS - "Random May-be-free Stuff"? Wait. That acronym's also taken. Darn! <<Sorry, I just couldn't resist :) >> More seriously: my apologies, but no good name or acronym immediately comes

Ok now we have an understanding, anysuggestion ? Michel.Ruffin@..., PhD Software Coordination Manager, Bell Labs, Corporate CTO Dpt Distinguished Member of Technical Staff Tel+33 (0) 6 75 25 21

Mark I am not a lawyer but I have a differentunderstanding of copyright law Attached is a document that explains the rationalebehind why the Creative Commons Zero license was selected by the

Re: "“Free and Open source Software” it is “Free and/or Open source software”; " I understand that. Which is why I said it is the union, rather than the intersection. In my highly

Well I have not reallythrough how this extend to the SPDX standard. But if you look at Blackduckprotext tool there is probably 1500 to 2000 licenses described, Palamida isaround 1500 (if I am not

With respect to the license list, an issue I happened to notice this morning is that items on it appear to reflect a very flat concept of a license when there are options, e.g.

Attached is a document that explains the rationale behind why the Creative Commons Zero license was selected by the SPDX legal working group. The core requirements for consideration were: o does not

We do not discuss or putinto question the FSF and OSI definitions of FOSS (I know them by heart, Iunderstand the philosophy behind them and respect them). We try to make adefinition of what should be

I sometimes skirt the issue by broadly referring "software that is freely available on the web." When one is talking about new projects, picking licenses, and the like, it makes sense to steer/limit

Re: " Out of this topic we just discussed (in my understanding) what could be a proper definition of “FOSS”. " The Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the Open Source Initiative (OSI) are the

Dear Michael The topic we are having here (but will probably move to another forum, potentially the LF Open compliance Program) is to create industry wide accepted common contract clauses for