...AND OF COURSE ;)

License Identifier: WTFPL
Formal Name: Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License
URL: http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/

...AND OF COURSE ;)

License Identifier: WTFPL
Formal Name: Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License
URL: http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/

I know that the Ruby license is pretty common.  I would vote to add that one.

Kim

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone



----- Reply message -----
From: "Philip Odence" <podence@...>
Date: Wed, Aug 11, 2010 6:33 am
Subject: Hello world and additional licenses
To: "<Soeren_Rabenstein@...>" <Soeren_Rabenstein@...>
Cc: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>

Welcome, Soeren. Glad to have you aboard.

This is certainly fair discussion. The goal has been to have the standard license list cover a large majority of cases (Kate's been talking about 90% coverage). Beyond that we have provided a mechanism for including licenses that are not on the list, the main differences being that for the latter the user will include the text of the license in the SPDX file, not just a reference to our list.

So, that fact that you have run across a license in your work would not on the face say that it meets the criteria for being included on the list. Do you think the licenses you list are fairly common and would belong on the list for that reason? Or do you think our criteria are too tight and that we should try to be more comprehensive in our coverage?

Phil


L. Philip Odence
Vice President of Business Development
Black Duck Software, inc.
265 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
Phone: 781.810.1819, Mobile: 781.258.9502
podence@...<mailto:podence@...>
http://www.blackducksoftware.com
http://twitter.com/podence
http://www.linkedin.com/in/podence
http://www.networkworld.com/community/odence (my blog)

On Aug 11, 2010, at 2:30 AM, <Soeren_Rabenstein@...<mailto:Soeren_Rabenstein@...>> wrote:

Hello spdx mailing list

I guess I am the first new subscriber, since you went public?
My name is Soeren Rabenstein, I am in ASUSTeK's legal department since early 2009 and responsible for European legal compliance as well as implementation of a FOSS license compliance program.

Thank you for creating the specification. We are very interested in bringing forward the standard, since "Software-BOMs" form a key element of our compliance program (we actually switched to the term "BOC"="Bill of Code", to avoid confusion with actual, physical BOMs) and supply chain management turned out to be the biggest challenge over here.

As a first contribution, I compared the list of specified licenses in the spdx-draft with my own approval list. As a result I would like to propose the following licenses to be added to spdx. With the exception of the last item, these are all licenses I came across during my practice. I may add them myself through the wiki, but currently I cannot see a working wiki page on this.
I am also happy to dig our more licenses that are not yet listed.


License Identifier: ClArtistic
Formal Name: Clarified Artistic License 1.0
URL: http://www.ncftp.com/ncftp/doc/LICENSE.txt

License Identifier: XFree86-1.1
Formal Name: XFree86 License 1.1
URL: http://www.xfree86.org/current/LICENSE4.html

License Identifier: Ruby
Formal Name: Ruby License
URL: http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txt

License Identifier: RHeCos
Formal Name: Red Hat eCos Public License v1.1
URL: http://ecos.sourceware.org/old-license.html

License Identifier: eCos
Formal Name: The eCos license version 2.0
URL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/ecos-license.html

License Identifier: OSSL
Formal Name: OpenSSL License
URL: ? (No direct web source known, license text therefore attached to this mail)

License Identifier: ErlPL
Formal Name: Erlang Public License Version 1.1
URL: http://www.erlang.org/EPLICENSE

License Identifier: gsoPL
Formal Name: gSOAP Public License Version 1.3b
URL: http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~engelen/license.html

License Identifier: SugPL
Formal Name: SugarCRM Public License
URL: http://www.sugarcrm.com/crm/SPL

License Identifier: YPL
Formal Name: Yahoo! Public License 1.1
URL: http://www.zimbra.com/license/yahoo_public_license_1.1.html

License Identifier: OLDAP-2.8
Formal Name: OpenLDAP Public License Version 2.8
URL: http://www.openldap.org/software/release/license.html

License Identifier: ZimPL
Formal Name: Zimbra Public License, Version 1.3
URL: http://www.zimbra.com/license/zimbra-public-license-1-3.html


...AND OF COURSE ;)

License Identifier: WTFPL
Formal Name: Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License
URL: http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/


Kind regards

Soeren Rabenstein

____________________________________________________________

ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.

Soeren Rabenstein, LL.M.
Legal Affairs Center - Legal Compliance Dept.
15, Li-Te Rd., Taipei 112, Taiwan
Tel.: (+886) 2 2894 3447 Ext.2372
Fax.: (+886) 2 2890 7674
soeren_rabenstein@...<mailto:soeren_rabenstein@...>
____________________________________________________________



=====================================================================================================================================
This email and any attachments to it contain confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it
is addressed.If you are not the intended recipient or receive it accidentally, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete
the message and any attachments from your computer system, and destroy all hard copies. If any, please be advised that any unauthorized
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on this, is illegal and prohibited. Furthermore, any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent those of ASUSTeK. Thank you for your cooperation.
=====================================================================================================================================
<OpenSSL-License.txt><ATT00001..c>

So, that fact that you have run across a license in your work would not on the
face say that it meets the criteria for being included on the list. Do you
think the licenses you list are fairly common and would belong on the list for
that reason?

I uploaded the pretty printer java program to the source auditor ftp server.  It’s a secure web server, so I apologize in advance if it’s a bit inconvenient to download.
 
The ftp server is at ftp.sourceauditor.com <ftp://ftp.sourceauditor.com>   You need to use explicit tls/ssl over port 21.  Logon with user spdx and password spdx1
 
The file SPDXPretty.zip contains the files mentioned in the previous email (copied below).
 
Let me know if you need more information or if you have any problems.
 
Gary

 

From: package-facts-bounces@... [mailto:package-facts-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Gary O'Neall
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 11:32 PM
To: package-facts@...
Subject: Java Pretty Printer

I completed an “alpha” version of a Java based pretty printer.  It’s 10MB in binary form with its dependencies.  Is there a place on the Wiki I can upload this to?  I tried to add it to a page as an attachment to a new discussion page, but the .zip filetype was not allowed.  Please advise on the best method to get this to the group.
 
Attached is a modified zlib example (see notes below on what items were changed) and an example output.
 
Below is some information and discussion points related to the pretty printer development:
 
I’m sure there are a few improvements to be made before calling this a “release”, but it  does provide some formatting and works for the zlib example.  I would appreciate any feedback once you have access to the application.
 
To run the application, make sure you have a JRE 1.6 installed (JRE version 1.5 may work, but it untested).  Unzip the files in your favorite directory.  Execute the jar file with a single text parameter of a file path for the SPDX RDF Document.
 
On windows, this would be “java –jar SPDXPretty.jar examples\zlib-1.2.5.spdxv3.rdf (assuming you copied the attached example file into the same directory as the .jar file and your cd’d to that directory).
 
I made a few changes to the zlib example to bring it up to date to the draft 20100731.  It is in the zip file in the examples directory.
 
I run into a few questions/issues as I implemented this, outlined below:
 
·        Namespace and tags – I noticed in the example we have only one namespace for SPDX and the tags used in the example did not match the tags in the specification in all cases  - e.g. License in the file is tagged FileLicense in the example.  Do we want to have separate namespaces for File, License, and Document?  If not, do we want the tags to be unique (e.g. FileLicense and PackageLicense)?   Technically, the tags don’t need to be unique, but it may aid in humans reading the RDF/XML file.

·        I changed the tags in the example to match the document in cases where they were still unique (e.g. ShortDescription -> ShortDesc)

·        License Names and Pretty Printing – I was only able to extract the URL for the license (as a resource) from the SPDX document which doesn’t lead to a very pretty license name.  Should we add a property License Name?  Should I parse the URL and only print out the tag (e.g. after the #)?

·        Example use of hasFile – In the example, the object of the hasFile predicate for the package subject all have the same URI.  I believe these should be unique since they represent different file objects.  I changed the example to make these individual and unique.

·        The disjunctive licenses are implemented but not tested.

·        There has not been much testing (Unit or otherwise)

 
I would like to make the code available as an open source project.  It is written using Jena (http://jena.sourceforge.net/) and contains a Java class which is a model basically wrapping a Jenna model of the RDF document.  It would probably be useful for many of you who are writing tools.  
 
I could post the code to SPDX, but I would rather maintain it in a repository which supports svn.  I’m thinking Google code may be a good location.  Open to suggestions.
 
As far a licenses, it’s currently under a 3 clause BSD since it’s GPL compatible and simple.  I’m open to other licenses, so let me know if you have a preference – we could even create a nice complex set of license choices ;)  Do keep in mind this is dependent on Jena which is licensed under a 3 clause BSD and contains some Apache licensed code.
 
Appreciate any comments.
 
Best regards,
 
Gary O’Neall
Source Auditor Inc.
 
 
 
 
 

Thanks Gary - thrilled that you contributed our first tool.
Although I explicitly specified ssl/tls, port 21, and accepted
certificate, seems to be rejecting the password spdx1 for user spdx

re:"With respect to some of your earlier questions,
* License Names and Pretty Printing - I was only able to extract
the URL for the license (as a resource) from the SPDX document which
doesn't lead to a very pretty license name. Should we add a property
License Name? Should I parse the URL and only print out the tag (e.g.
after the #)?"

---> I'd like to go with parsing the URL and printing out the tag (after
the #).

We ought to have an RDF document on our site for each license, and the
License Name is a property of each license.

re: "Namespace and tags - I noticed in the example we have only one
namespace for SPDX and the tags used in the example did not match the

in the specification in all cases - e.g. License in the file is tagged
FileLicense in the example. Do we want to have separate namespaces for
File, License, and Document? If not, do we want the tags to be unique
(e.g. FileLicense and PackageLicense)? Technically, the tags don't

to be unique, but it may aid in humans reading the RDF/XML file."

---> I think it's ok to adopt in the RDF the non-unique (shorter) tags

in the specification. On one of the calls, the vibe from the group was
for the shorter tags. (e.g. 'License', not 'FileLicense'). Unfortunately

never sent around a new example incorporating that feedback (by then the
zilb example was making the rounds). I think it is acceptable and

to keep it in the same namespace.

- Bill

On 8/10/10 11:19 PM, "Gary O'Neall" <gary@...> wrote:

I uploaded the pretty printer java program to the source auditor ftp
server. It's a secure web server, so I apologize in advance if it's a

inconvenient to download.

The ftp server is at ftp.sourceauditor.com <ftp://ftp.sourceauditor.com>

You need to use explicit tls/ssl over port 21. Logon with user spdx and
password spdx1

The file SPDXPretty.zip contains the files mentioned in the previous

(copied below).

Let me know if you need more information or if you have any problems.

Gary



From: package-facts-bounces@...
[mailto:package-facts-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Gary O'Neall
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 11:32 PM
To: package-facts@...
Subject: Java Pretty Printer

I completed an "alpha" version of a Java based pretty printer. It's

in binary form with its dependencies. Is there a place on the Wiki I

upload this to? I tried to add it to a page as an attachment to a new
discussion page, but the .zip filetype was not allowed. Please advise

the best method to get this to the group.

Attached is a modified zlib example (see notes below on what items were
changed) and an example output.

Below is some information and discussion points related to the pretty
printer development:

I'm sure there are a few improvements to be made before calling this a
"release", but it does provide some formatting and works for the zlib
example. I would appreciate any feedback once you have access to the
application.

To run the application, make sure you have a JRE 1.6 installed (JRE
version 1.5 may work, but it untested). Unzip the files in your

directory. Execute the jar file with a single text parameter of a file
path for the SPDX RDF Document.

On windows, this would be "java -jar SPDXPretty.jar
examples\zlib-1.2.5.spdxv3.rdf (assuming you copied the attached example
file into the same directory as the .jar file and your cd'd to that
directory).

I made a few changes to the zlib example to bring it up to date to the
draft 20100731. It is in the zip file in the examples directory.

I run into a few questions/issues as I implemented this, outlined below:

* Namespace and tags - I noticed in the example we have only one
namespace for SPDX and the tags used in the example did not match the

in the specification in all cases - e.g. License in the file is tagged
FileLicense in the example. Do we want to have separate namespaces for
File, License, and Document? If not, do we want the tags to be unique
(e.g. FileLicense and PackageLicense)? Technically, the tags don't

to be unique, but it may aid in humans reading the RDF/XML file.

* I changed the tags in the example to match the document in

where they were still unique (e.g. ShortDescription -> ShortDesc)

* License Names and Pretty Printing - I was only able to extract
the URL for the license (as a resource) from the SPDX document which
doesn't lead to a very pretty license name. Should we add a property
License Name? Should I parse the URL and only print out the tag (e.g.
after the #)?

* Example use of hasFile - In the example, the object of the
hasFile predicate for the package subject all have the same URI. I

these should be unique since they represent different file objects. I
changed the example to make these individual and unique.

* The disjunctive licenses are implemented but not tested.

* There has not been much testing (Unit or otherwise)


I would like to make the code available as an open source project. It

written using Jena (http://jena.sourceforge.net/) and contains a Java

which is a model basically wrapping a Jenna model of the RDF document.

would probably be useful for many of you who are writing tools.

I could post the code to SPDX, but I would rather maintain it in a
repository which supports svn. I'm thinking Google code may be a good
location. Open to suggestions.

As far a licenses, it's currently under a 3 clause BSD since it's GPL
compatible and simple. I'm open to other licenses, so let me know if

have a preference - we could even create a nice complex set of license
choices ;) Do keep in mind this is dependent on Jena which is licensed
under a 3 clause BSD and contains some Apache licensed code.

Appreciate any comments.

Best regards,

Gary O'Neall
Source Auditor Inc.







Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com