Date   

Agenda for Thursday SPDX General Meeting

Philip Odence
 

Note: I have an immovable conflict, so Kirsten will be standing in.

Meeting Time: April 21, 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



Action Items

Most of the action items belong with the Teams. So, in addition to statusing, we will dispatch them to the respective teams and will not continue to track in this meeting. Action items for this meeting will be cross functional.

• Kate/Kim- Draft example for LF Member Counsel; include XML and spreadsheet. PENDING
  • Beta collateral - March 17th.   

• MartinM- Report back on # of people on respective mailing lists. DONE, BUT LET'S KEEP UPDATING

Phil O. - Capture a list of who will be at face to face meeting - DONE

  • create signup on WIKI for LinuxCollabSummit attendees,  adverstise in subgroups, and on these minutes/list.


Minutes available from Biz team meeting

Kim Weins
 

http://www.spdx.org/wiki/business-team-meeting-agendaminutes-20110414

We talked about the beta program and also about launching the three threads decided on at the LF F2F meeting.  See minutes for details.

Kim


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


REMINDER: SPDX Business (Rollout) Call 11ET/8PT

Kim Weins
 

Hope to see you in 45 minutes. For agenda, we will cover follow up from
some of the Collab Summit items plus a few miscellaneous items for Beta.

Kim


------ Original Appointment

From: kim.weins@...

When: 9:00 AM - 10:00 AM December 9, 2010
Subject: SPDX Business (Rollout) Call 11ET/8PT
Location: See dial in below

US 866-740-1260
Int'l http://www.readytalk.com/support/international-numbers.php

ID 2404502

Web Meeting
Www.readytalk.com
ID 2404502

Agenda
We will be covering several areas on the rollout plan.

1. Beta process
2. User Content - what is needed
3. Evangelism and outreachOccurs every 2 week(s) on Thursday effective Thu
12/9/10

------ End Of Original Appointment


Cross Distribution Licensing Summit May 11th LinuxTag

Ciaran Farrell
 

** http://www.linuxtag.org/2011/en/program/free-conference/all-speakers/details.html?talkid=621 **


Hi,


some of the people within the various Linux distributions have been in contact with the aim of trying to improve collaboration on some issues of software licensing - an area which hasn't seen much collaboration up to now.


Whereas it can be understood that each distribution will make certain decisions relating to choice of 'good' and 'bad' licenses and the interpretation of those licenses and how those licenses interact with other licenses, there is certainly scope for collaboration in other areas.


For example, the discussions on the SPDX mailing list combined with cross distribution collaboration in another area (http://distributions.freedesktop.org/wiki/AppStream) encouraged us to see if we could e.g. agree on short names for licenses (GPLv2, GPLv2+, LGPLv2.1+ etc). This may sound quite trivial but it is a substantial step forward, particularly for downstream users of the distributions.


The "Cross Distribution Licensing Summit" on Wednesday May 11th 2011 10:00 - 13:00 is intended to have a workshop type character. We'll propose a loose program to keep discussions on track but hope that the proposed discursive nature of the meeting will lead to more concrete understanding of current practises of the various distributions and where we can collaborate.


I hope that the discussion will also be interesting to industry members in general, as well as to those with interest in SPDX. Therefore, if you are in Berlin/at LinuxTag on the 2011-05-11, why not drop in to Messehalle Regensburg between 10:00 and 13:00 and get involved in the discussions! If you're interested, I'd appreciate if you could send me a quick mail (cfarrell@...) just so I can get an idea of numbers/what distributions/what companies etc.


** http://www.linuxtag.org/2011/en/program/free-conference/all-speakers/details.html?talkid=621 **


Above is the official URL of the workshop - please don't be put off by its "presentation" appearance - as mentioned above we will possibly showcase some technologies used by the various distributions already to help with licensing, but it is not intended to be a three hour presentation.


Ciaran

--

Ciaran Farrell __o

cfarrell@... _`\<,_

Phone: +49 (0)911 74053 262 (_)/ (_)

SUSE Linux Products GmbH,

GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)

Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409, Nuremberg, Germany


/ˈkiː.ræn/



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

Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...>
 

This event has been changed.

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

Changed: All:

The meeting regularly scheduled for 6-April-2010 is postponed until next week as most attends are either in at the Linux Conference or European Legal Network Conference.

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
Changed: Wed Apr 13 8am – 9am Pacific Time
Where
Conference Bridge 1.877.825.8522 PIN:0376146 (map)
Calendar
spdx@...
Who
Esteban Rockett - organizer
amanda.brock@...
tony.gomes@...
sadams@...
feb.cabrasawan@...
jmcbroom@...
rfontana@...
linda.shih@...
Alexandra.Siegel@...
mpierovi@...
kathleen.mullins@...
JOHN ELLIS
rtiller@...
alastern@...
Mikko.Amper@...
adcohn@...
paul.madick@...
ilardi@...
areid@...
tom.incorvia@...
Mansour Ghomeshi
smortin@...
owen.james.boyle@...
scott.k.peterson@...
Guy.Colpitts@...
bgieseman@...
pmcbride@...
spaek@...
tcarlson@...
andrew.wilson@...
barbara.reilly@...
jwacha@...
bkahin@...
vmah@...
andrew.updegrove@...
mrc@...
mccoy.smith@...
ssemel@...
gsjones@...
kcopenhaver@...
spdx-legal-request@...
spdx@...

Going?   Yes - Maybe - No    more options »

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.


Interesting Project in another organization

Andrew.Updegrove@...
 

As I expect most of you know, XML-based schema have been created for
hundreds of different information domains, from sports scores (SportsXML)
to advertising copy (AdXML) to human resources (HRXML) data to financial
data (XBRL), and on and on.

The scope of the attached RFP for another client of mine describes a
project that demonstrates how XML might be useful in the licensing domain,
and the ambitious schedule illustrates how manageable such a project can
be. Because XML is so widely used, schema and tools based on XML are
readily understood and used by a broad range of users.

As a result, I thought you might find it interesting and provocative.

Best,

Andy

(See attached file: OSCRE LSDP Call for Tech 31 Mar 11.pdf)

Any tax information or written tax advice contained herein (including any attachments) is not intended to be and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)

Electronic mail from Gesmer Updegrove LLP, 40 Broad Street, Boston, MA 02109. Voice: (617) 350-6800, Fax: (617) 350-6878. This communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named as the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged and/or confidential under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or such recipient's employee or agent, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify Christopher O'Sullivan at (617) 350-6800 and notify the sender by electronic mail. Please expunge this communication without making any copies. Thank you for your cooperation.


REMINDER: SPDX Business (Rollout) Call 11ET/8PT

Kim Weins
 

Agenda will be :
Discuss agenda for F2F next week
Review draft of training materials

Kim



------ Original Appointment

From: kim.weins@...

When: 9:00 AM - 10:00 AM March 31, 2011
Subject: SPDX Business (Rollout) Call 11ET/8PT
Location: See dial in below

US 866-740-1260
Int'l http://www.readytalk.com/support/international-numbers.php

ID 2404502

Web Meeting
Www.readytalk.com
ID 2404502

Agenda
We will be covering several areas on the rollout plan.

1. Beta process
2. User Content - what is needed
3. Evangelism and outreach

------ End Of Original Appointment


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

dmg
 

Philip Odence twisted the bytes to say:


Philip> Yes, and let's not forget this same point when we are talking about the process of adding new license to the standard list. The discussion is never
Philip> whether the license can be included in an SPDX file—it always can be—the only issue from the SPDX file creator's perspective is whether it matches a
Philip> license on the standard list with a predefined short name, or whether they have to go the one extra step of including the license text in Section 4.
Philip> Licensing Info and create their own local short name.

One interesting aspect of licenses that are "almost" a match is that, if
they are only listed as "unknown", the knowledge/analysis performed by
the SPDX-file's author might be lost (why is such license unknown).

Perhaps a "comment" field attached to any attribute (file, package, etc)
that can have a license would be very useful to include a rational.

--dmg


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


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

Philip Odence
 

Yes, and let's not forget this same point when we are talking about the process of adding new license to the standard list. The discussion is never whether the license can be included in an SPDX file—it always can be—the only issue from the SPDX file creator's perspective is whether it matches a license on the standard list with a predefined short name, or whether they have to go the one extra step of including the license text in Section 4. Licensing Info and create their own local short name.

From: Jilayne Lovejoy <jilayne.lovejoy@...>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:26:20 -0400
To: dmg <dmg@...>, Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...>
Cc: Kate Stewart <kate.stewart@...>, "spdx-legal@..." <spdx-legal@...>, "spdx@..." <spdx@...>, Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...>
Subject: Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

These variant licenses would simply end up needing to be added as a “nonstandard” license, meaning the SPDX generator would not be able to use the standardized SPDX license list shortname for that license, but it wouldn’t (shouldn’t) be tagged as unknown in such a case.


On 3/23/11 10:54 AM, "dmg" <dmg@...> wrote:



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...> wrote:
I believe we already discussed this to some degree and decided that we would not enter the arena of word equivalents with the exception of spelling variations for known American-British English.  Although there are certainly plenty of words that seem “safe” to equate, that begins to feel like a slippery slope in terms of the potential for different meanings or the license author’s intent getting altered.  More specifically, many licenses have definitions for such words.  Past and present tense can also be tricky, both from deciding how and when it’s okay to use either tense.  All in all, I think it’s best to take a very conservative approach to what we will “replace” in terms of templatizing the licenses.  We can always expand, but it would be very hard to roll it back later on.  Just my two cents.


I agree. I wonder if a solution is to allow the specification of "variant" of a license. Perhaps a way to say: the closest license is this one, with a text similarity metric of X, and where the differences are  such and such. Otherwise a lot of BSD and MIT licensed files will be listed as unknown/other.


--dmg
 
Certainly the BSD and Apache 1.1 licenses are problematic, because they are often verbatim with the exception of the author’s name in the third clause (BSD) and the third, fourth, and fifth clause (Apache 1.1) as well as the disclaimer sections for both.  We are working through how/where to capture this, as well as copyright notices in general, though.



Jilayne Lovejoy |  Corporate Counsel
jlovejoy@...

720 240 4545  |  phone
720 240 4556  |  fax
1 888 OpenLogic  |  toll free
www.openlogic.com

OpenLogic, Inc.
10910 W 120th Ave, Suite 450
Broomfield, Colorado 80021


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

Jilayne Lovejoy <jilayne.lovejoy@...>
 

These variant licenses would simply end up needing to be added as a “nonstandard” license, meaning the SPDX generator would not be able to use the standardized SPDX license list shortname for that license, but it wouldn’t (shouldn’t) be tagged as unknown in such a case.


On 3/23/11 10:54 AM, "dmg" <dmg@...> wrote:



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...> wrote:
I believe we already discussed this to some degree and decided that we would not enter the arena of word equivalents with the exception of spelling variations for known American-British English.  Although there are certainly plenty of words that seem “safe” to equate, that begins to feel like a slippery slope in terms of the potential for different meanings or the license author’s intent getting altered.  More specifically, many licenses have definitions for such words.  Past and present tense can also be tricky, both from deciding how and when it’s okay to use either tense.  All in all, I think it’s best to take a very conservative approach to what we will “replace” in terms of templatizing the licenses.  We can always expand, but it would be very hard to roll it back later on.  Just my two cents.


I agree. I wonder if a solution is to allow the specification of "variant" of a license. Perhaps a way to say: the closest license is this one, with a text similarity metric of X, and where the differences are  such and such. Otherwise a lot of BSD and MIT licensed files will be listed as unknown/other.


--dmg
 
Certainly the BSD and Apache 1.1 licenses are problematic, because they are often verbatim with the exception of the author’s name in the third clause (BSD) and the third, fourth, and fifth clause (Apache 1.1) as well as the disclaimer sections for both.  We are working through how/where to capture this, as well as copyright notices in general, though.



Jilayne Lovejoy |  Corporate Counsel
jlovejoy@...

720 240 4545  |  phone
720 240 4556  |  fax
1 888 OpenLogic  |  toll free
www.openlogic.com

OpenLogic, Inc.
10910 W 120th Ave, Suite 450
Broomfield, Colorado 80021


Minutes Posted from 3/24 Meeting

Philip Odence
 

Please let us know if you are coming to the Face to Face meetings at the LF Collaboration Summit

If you came late to the meeting today and I did not log your attendance, please let me know.

Because of the Collab Summit, next General meeting will be April 21.




Administrative Agenda

    Attendance: 15
    Minutes accepted http://www.spdx.org/wiki/20110224-general-meeting-minutes

 http://www.spdx.org/wiki/20110311-general-meeting-minutes

Technical Team Report - Kate

After a great deal of effort, the team has converged on a consistent set of field names which will by synch'ed with all forms of spec shortly.

There are still a couple of areas of open issues which are dependent on the Legal Team, most having to do with who created the SPDX file.

Kate will be starting up a wiki page with an agenda for the upcoming Face to Face; participants should feel free to provide input.

Business Team Report - Phil

Beta training materials are not complete, but are in motion and should be fine for beta.

In the last meeting there was a lot of discussion about a process for requesting/evaluating/adding new licenses to the standard list. See last Business Team meeting's minutes for details.

Legal Team Report - Rockett

SPDX Tool/Template Licensing- Done, we'll be using Apache 2.0

Metadata Licensing

  • Stil active discussion delving in aspects of:
    • Confidentiality
    • Trace ability and change logging
    • Copyright
  • Rockett and Kate are having an offline discussion to pull it all together.

Templatizing (defining what insubstantial variants are OK for a match to a standard license)

  • Proposal being reviewed within Legal Team
  • Ready for presentation to other teams in the next 1-2 months

 

Cross Functional Issues – Phil

 Collaboration Summit 

Discussion about how to handle "Newbee" question that come in on lists 

  • Asking Business Team to take on providing guidelines to other teams and general 
  • General feeling that we need a process to
    • Respond in 24 hours
    • Provide answers that are consistent with "party line" but at the same time helpful
    • Ensure that good questions / answers get captured in FAQ

Action Items

Most of the action items belong with the Teams. So, in addition to statusing, we will dispatch them to the respective teams and will not continue to track in this meeting. Action items for this meeting will be cross functional.

• Kate- Beta collateral: Examples in XML and spreadsheet form. PENDING 

• MartinM- Report back on # of people on respective mailing lists. ONGOING

  •  
    • spdx: 98
    • spdz-biz: 17
    • spdx-legal: 23
    • spdx-tech: 21

Phil O. - Capture a list of who will be at face to face meeting - DONE

Attendees

  • Phil Odence, Black Duck Software
  • Kirsten Newcomer, Black Duck Software
  • Esteban Rockett, Motorola
  • Phil Koltun, Linux Foundation
  • Kate Stewart, Canonical
  • Tom Incorvia, Microfocus
  • Gary O'Neall, Source Auditor
  • Jillayne Lovejoy, OpenLogic
  • Karen Copenhaver, LF/Choate
  • Michael Herzog, NexB
  • Pierre Lapointe, NexB
  • Kamal Hassin, Protecode
  • Jilayne Lovejoy, Open Logic
  • Martin Michlmayr, HP
  • Bill Schineller, Black Duck Software


Re: Update on spdx subscriber numbers

Martin Michlmayr
 

Another update on the mailing list numbers:

spdx: 98
spdz-biz: 17
spdx-legal: 23
spdx-tech: 21

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


Re: [FOSSology] License Identifiers - FOSSology & SPDX

Laser, Mary <mary.laser@...>
 

Yes! We are closely following evolution of the SPDX standard. We will eventually align FOSSology to adopt the standard.

Mary


Mary Laser
The FOSSology Project
http://fossology.org

-----Original Message-----
From: fossology-bounces@... [mailto:fossology-
bounces@...] On Behalf Of Roger Meier
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 4:07 PM
To: fossology@...; spdx@...
Subject: [FOSSology] License Identifiers - FOSSology & SPDX

Hi all

I'm interested in using FOSSology and the SPDX standard for future
projects.
It would be great to have at least one well supported open source
software
solution like FOSSology which is using the SPDX standard. This will
help all
of us to be license compliant and economic whenever we use open source
software.

However, SPDX is still in definition phase and it probably does not fit
perfectly to FOSSology.
The license meta data is a very important thing required to automate
license
analysis and that's the place where I've identified a mismatch, the
license
short name or license identifier.

FOSSology has some very nice metadata for each license, e.g.
Date: 2004-01-01 00:00:00
URL: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
shortname: ASL v2.0
fullname: Apache Software License v2.0
OSIapproved: Yes
FSFfree: Yes
GPLv2compatible: No
GPLv3compatible: Yes
copyleft: No
notes: ....
for further details see
http://fossology.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fossology/trunk/fossology/a
gents
/license_files/Apachev2.0.meta?revision=HEAD&view=markup

SPDX is using its own license identifier:
Full name of License: Apache License 2.0
License Identifier: Apache-2
Source/URL: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Notes: This version was released: January 2004, This license is
OSI
certified
for further details see
http://www.spdx.org/wiki/working-version-license-list

Are there any plans to align these identifiers?
Does somebody know some other standards used for license meta data?

-roger

_______________________________________________
fossology mailing list
fossology@...
http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology


Agenda for SPDX General Meeting MARCH 24 / Minutes from last meeting / Linux Collaboration Summit Info

Philip Odence
 

Sorry, got my months mixed up…Feb had a Thurs 24 too! But the meeting is March 24.

From: Phil Odence <podence@...>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:10:03 -0400
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Subject: FW: Agenda for SPDX General Meeting Feb 24 / Minutes from last meeting / Linux Collaboration Summit Info

Resending as a reminder of Thursday's meeting.

If you are coming to the Collaboration Summit and will participate in one or both Face to Face SPDX Meetings, please RSVP at: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/linux-collaboration-summit



From: Phil Odence <podence@...>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:08:22 -0400
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Subject: Agenda for SPDX General Meeting Feb 24 / Minutes from last meeting / Linux Collaboration Summit Info

For the minutes to the last meeting go to: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/20110311-general-meeting-minutes

Please join us for the SPDX sessions at the Linux Collaboration Summit, April 6-8: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/linux-collaboration-summit

For the next General Meeting, note that the US is now on daylight time.

Meeting Time: March 24, 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

Web:
I've been including this only for attendance purposes, but the size of the calls has been such that we can do it the ol' fashioned way.
 
Administrative Agenda
Attendance
Technical Team Report - Kate

Business Team Report - Kim


Legal Team Report - Rockett/Karen


Cross Functional Issues - Phil



Action Items

Most of the action items belong with the Teams. So, in addition to statusing, we will dispatch them to the respective teams and will not continue to track in this meeting. Action items for this meeting will be cross functional.

• Kate/Kim- Draft example for LF Member Counsel; include XML and spreadsheet. PENDING
  • Beta collateral - March 17th.   

• MartinM- Report back on # of people on respective mailing lists. DONE, BUT LET'S KEEP UPDATING

Phil O. - Capture a list of who will be at face to face meeting - PENDING

  • create signup on WIKI for LinuxCollabSummit attendees,  adverstise in subgroups, and on these minutes/list.



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
Skype: philip.odence


FW: Agenda for SPDX General Meeting Feb 24 / Minutes from last meeting / Linux Collaboration Summit Info

Philip Odence
 

Resending as a reminder of Thursday's meeting.

If you are coming to the Collaboration Summit and will participate in one or both Face to Face SPDX Meetings, please RSVP at: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/linux-collaboration-summit



From: Phil Odence <podence@...>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:08:22 -0400
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Subject: Agenda for SPDX General Meeting Feb 24 / Minutes from last meeting / Linux Collaboration Summit Info

For the minutes to the last meeting go to: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/20110311-general-meeting-minutes

Please join us for the SPDX sessions at the Linux Collaboration Summit, April 6-8: http://www.spdx.org/wiki/linux-collaboration-summit

For the next General Meeting, note that the US is now on daylight time.

Meeting Time: Feb 24, 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

Web:
I've been including this only for attendance purposes, but the size of the calls has been such that we can do it the ol' fashioned way.
 
Administrative Agenda
Attendance
Technical Team Report - Kate

Business Team Report - Kim


Legal Team Report - Rockett/Karen


Cross Functional Issues - Phil



Action Items

Most of the action items belong with the Teams. So, in addition to statusing, we will dispatch them to the respective teams and will not continue to track in this meeting. Action items for this meeting will be cross functional.

• Kate/Kim- Draft example for LF Member Counsel; include XML and spreadsheet. PENDING
  • Beta collateral - March 17th.   

• MartinM- Report back on # of people on respective mailing lists. DONE, BUT LET'S KEEP UPDATING

Phil O. - Capture a list of who will be at face to face meeting - PENDING

  • create signup on WIKI for LinuxCollabSummit attendees,  adverstise in subgroups, and on these minutes/list.



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
Skype: philip.odence


License Identifiers - FOSSology & SPDX

Roger Meier <roger@...>
 

Hi all

I'm interested in using FOSSology and the SPDX standard for future projects.
It would be great to have at least one well supported open source software
solution like FOSSology which is using the SPDX standard. This will help all
of us to be license compliant and economic whenever we use open source
software.

However, SPDX is still in definition phase and it probably does not fit
perfectly to FOSSology.
The license meta data is a very important thing required to automate license
analysis and that's the place where I've identified a mismatch, the license
short name or license identifier.

FOSSology has some very nice metadata for each license, e.g.
Date: 2004-01-01 00:00:00
URL: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
shortname: ASL v2.0
fullname: Apache Software License v2.0
OSIapproved: Yes
FSFfree: Yes
GPLv2compatible: No
GPLv3compatible: Yes
copyleft: No
notes: ....
for further details see
http://fossology.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fossology/trunk/fossology/agents
/license_files/Apachev2.0.meta?revision=HEAD&view=markup

SPDX is using its own license identifier:
Full name of License: Apache License 2.0
License Identifier: Apache-2
Source/URL: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Notes: This version was released: January 2004, This license is OSI
certified
for further details see
http://www.spdx.org/wiki/working-version-license-list

Are there any plans to align these identifiers?
Does somebody know some other standards used for license meta data?

-roger


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

dmg
 



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...> wrote:
I believe we already discussed this to some degree and decided that we would not enter the arena of word equivalents with the exception of spelling variations for known American-British English.  Although there are certainly plenty of words that seem “safe” to equate, that begins to feel like a slippery slope in terms of the potential for different meanings or the license author’s intent getting altered.  More specifically, many licenses have definitions for such words.  Past and present tense can also be tricky, both from deciding how and when it’s okay to use either tense.  All in all, I think it’s best to take a very conservative approach to what we will “replace” in terms of templatizing the licenses.  We can always expand, but it would be very hard to roll it back later on.  Just my two cents.


I agree. I wonder if a solution is to allow the specification of "variant" of a license. Perhaps a way to say: the closest license is this one, with a text similarity metric of X, and where the differences are  such and such. Otherwise a lot of BSD and MIT licensed files will be listed as unknown/other.


--dmg
 
Certainly the BSD and Apache 1.1 licenses are problematic, because they are often verbatim with the exception of the author’s name in the third clause (BSD) and the third, fourth, and fifth clause (Apache 1.1) as well as the disclaimer sections for both.  We are working through how/where to capture this, as well as copyright notices in general, though.



--
--dmg

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


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

Jilayne Lovejoy <jilayne.lovejoy@...>
 

I believe we already discussed this to some degree and decided that we would not enter the arena of word equivalents with the exception of spelling variations for known American-British English.  Although there are certainly plenty of words that seem “safe” to equate, that begins to feel like a slippery slope in terms of the potential for different meanings or the license author’s intent getting altered.  More specifically, many licenses have definitions for such words.  Past and present tense can also be tricky, both from deciding how and when it’s okay to use either tense.  All in all, I think it’s best to take a very conservative approach to what we will “replace” in terms of templatizing the licenses.  We can always expand, but it would be very hard to roll it back later on.  Just my two cents.

Certainly the BSD and Apache 1.1 licenses are problematic, because they are often verbatim with the exception of the author’s name in the third clause (BSD) and the third, fourth, and fifth clause (Apache 1.1) as well as the disclaimer sections for both.  We are working through how/where to capture this, as well as copyright notices in general, though.



Jilayne


On 3/23/11 10:11 AM, "Kate Stewart" <kate.stewart@...> wrote:


Thanks Daniel,

    Will look into adding this after we can get the guidance from the lawyers as to what varients are equivalent.  ;)   

Kate


--- On Wed, 3/23/11, dmg <dmg@...> wrote:

From: dmg <dmg@...>
Subject: Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream
To: "Esteban Rockett" <mgia3940@...>
Cc: spdx-legal@..., spdx@...
Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2011, 9:48 AM



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@... </mc/compose?to=mgia3940@...> > wrote:
Agenda Legal WorkStream

(4) Review and Discuss --- Guidelines for "Templatizing" licenses

Please goto:  http://spdx.org/wiki/guidelines-templatizing-licenses


I think it is going in the right direction. You should look at the way Ninka normalizes test  for in-file licenses (BSD, MIT, etc).
For the BSD and MIT variants the problems are not only spelling, but in some cases, variants in grammar: past vs present
tense, use of word "software", "product", "program", "library" in the same place.



_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

Jilayne Lovejoy |  Corporate Counsel
jlovejoy@...

720 240 4545  |  phone
720 240 4556  |  fax
1 888 OpenLogic  |  toll free
www.openlogic.com

OpenLogic, Inc.
10910 W 120th Ave, Suite 450
Broomfield, Colorado 80021


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

kate.stewart@...
 


Thanks Daniel,

    Will look into adding this after we can get the guidance from the lawyers as to what varients are equivalent.  ;)  

Kate


--- On Wed, 3/23/11, dmg <dmg@...> wrote:

From: dmg <dmg@...>
Subject: Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream
To: "Esteban Rockett" <mgia3940@...>
Cc: spdx-legal@..., spdx@...
Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2011, 9:48 AM



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...> wrote:
Agenda Legal WorkStream

(4) Review and Discuss --- Guidelines for "Templatizing" licenses



I think it is going in the right direction. You should look at the way Ninka normalizes test  for in-file licenses (BSD, MIT, etc).
For the BSD and MIT variants the problems are not only spelling, but in some cases, variants in grammar: past vs present
tense, use of word "software", "product", "program", "library" in the same place.


Re: Today's Agenda Legal WorkStream

dmg
 



On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Esteban Rockett <mgia3940@...> wrote:
Agenda Legal WorkStream

(4) Review and Discuss --- Guidelines for "Templatizing" licenses



I think it is going in the right direction. You should look at the way Ninka normalizes test  for in-file licenses (BSD, MIT, etc).
For the BSD and MIT variants the problems are not only spelling, but in some cases, variants in grammar: past vs present
tense, use of word "software", "product", "program", "library" in the same place.



--dmg

 

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx




--
--dmg

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

1241 - 1260 of 1604