License List v1.6 - uploaded
|
Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...>
Hi All,
I’ve just uploaded v1.6 of the License List. This reflects the following changes: - License Identifiers (short names) updated to be consistent with Debian short names - No changes in our full names - Deleted the “Recognized Exceptions” column – this wasn’t being used anyway
Other differences that were not changed: - we use “MIT” – Debian uses “Expat” as license name - Debian calls “IBM Common Public License” what SPDX calls “IBM Public License” and a separate “Common Public License” – left as is; my observation/understanding is that IPL and CPL are different (yet similar)
One remaining thing that Debian caught here (http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat) à SPDX has a LGPL+ which is to denote where LGPL is listed as the applicable license, with no version whatsoever indicated. We do not have the equivalent for GPL – should we add the former or get rid of the latter? Seems to me this scenario would essentially be the same as the oldest LGPL/GPL “or later.” In this situation, the SPDX file creator could choose to take the extra step of determining the earliest copyright notice and then apply that logic to determine which version of GPL/LGPL could applied at the earliest, record this as the “Concluded License,” and comment accordingly in the “License Comment” section. Anyone want to concur or contradict, so I can make the change and re-upload again?
Cheers,
Jilayne Lovejoy | Corporate Counsel
720 240 4545 | phone 720 240 4556 | fax 1 888 OpenLogic | toll free
OpenLogic, Inc. Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado 80021
|
|
|
|
Philippe Ombredanne
On 2011-02-02 21:21, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote:
Hi All,Thanks! One remaining thing that Debian caught hereimho we should have support for both GPL and LGPL there. Note that I think that the + there is misleading. its means "or later" elsewhere and here it means "any version". I would rather go with GPL and LGPL than GPL+ and LGPL+ See comment below. Seems to me this scenario would essentially be the same as the oldest In this situation, the SPDX file creator couldI would disagree. The GPL and LGPL are very clear there: In the GPL 2.0 for instance: "9. [...] If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." There is no determination of facts that can be done. There is a choice. The earliest copyright would not be a relevant fact but rather your interpretation.
-- Cordially Philippe philippe ombredanne | 1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com nexB - Open by Design (tm) - http://www.nexb.com |
|
|
|
Jilayne Lovejoy <Jlovejoy@...>
Ah! Great point, Philippe, I forgot about that important detail in Sec. 9 of the GPL. In which case, my first scenario - that the oldest GPL/LGPL "or later" license on our list - would apply where no version is indicated. In this case, it seems that our LGPL+ should be taken off the list as its superfluous, agreed? I can't think of a scenario where having this listed separately is of any use, but I could be missing something...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Jilayne Lovejoy | Corporate Counsel jlovejoy@... 720 240 4545 | phone 720 240 4556 | fax 1 888 OpenLogic | toll free www.openlogic.com OpenLogic, Inc. Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado 80021 -----Original Message-----
From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Philippe Ombredanne Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 2:21 PM To: spdx@... Subject: Re: License List v1.6 - uploaded On 2011-02-02 21:21, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote: Hi All,Thanks! One remaining thing that Debian caught hereimho we should have support for both GPL and LGPL there. Note that I think that the + there is misleading. its means "or later" elsewhere and here it means "any version". I would rather go with GPL and LGPL than GPL+ and LGPL+ See comment below. Seems to me this scenario would essentially be the same as the oldest In this situation, the SPDX file creator couldI would disagree. The GPL and LGPL are very clear there: In the GPL 2.0 for instance: "9. [...] If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." There is no determination of facts that can be done. There is a choice. The earliest copyright would not be a relevant fact but rather your interpretation.
-- Cordially Philippe philippe ombredanne | 1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com nexB - Open by Design (tm) - http://www.nexb.com _______________________________________________ Spdx mailing list Spdx@... https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx |
|
|