spdx@lists.spdx.org | Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Date Date 1 - 6 of 6

Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0"

Richard Fontana #528 FWIW, I don't think I've ever encountered "Eclipse" meaning "Eclipse Public License". Always EPL or the full expanded name. - Richard toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 07:48:09PM -0600, Tom Incorvia wrote: Thanks Mike, The Eclipse Foundation certainly gets the big vote regarding how their license is referred to. My experience is primarily commercial ISVs in the tools space, about a dozen, ranging in yearly revenue from $50M to $500M. In written correspondence over a period of several years, the phrase "Eclipse 1.0" is used more than 15x "EPL 1.0". The folks using the ”Eclipse 1.0” term have included many substantial contributors to the Eclipse project (for instance, Borland Software). Let’s let this cook for one more day. If the feedback continues as it has, I’ll simply withdraw the request. Like you, I am surprised at the disparity in usage of the abbreviated term – I rarely see EPL, and assumed that this suggestion would pass through the SPDX group as more of an FYI. Thanks again -- it is great to have community postings so the broadest view is represented. Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 From: Mike Milinkovich [mailto:mike.milinkovich@...] Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:16 PM To: Tom Incorvia; spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@... Cc: 'SPDX' Subject: RE: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" Tom, FWIW, It is certainly news to me that people refer to the EPL as "Eclipse". I have universally heard it referred to as the EPL. I have literally never heard it referred to as Eclipse. I don't have a strong feeling about this one way or another. I just find it surprising that my experience is so contrary to yours. Mike Milinkovich Executive Director Eclipse Foundation, Inc. Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228 Mobile: +1.613.220.3223 mike.milinkovich@... blog: http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mike/ twitter: @mmilinkov Description: EclipseCon 2012 From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Tom Incorvia Sent: February-29-12 4:00 PM To: spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@... Cc: SPDX Subject: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController. _______________________________________________ Spdx mailing list Spdx@... https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx
More All Messages By This Member
Tom Incorvia #526 Thanks Mike, The Eclipse Foundation certainly gets the big vote regarding how their license is referred to. My experience is primarily commercial ISVs in the tools space, about a dozen, ranging in yearly revenue from $50M to $500M. In written correspondence over a period of several years, the phrase "Eclipse 1.0" is used more than 15x "EPL 1.0". The folks using the ”Eclipse 1.0” term have included many substantial contributors to the Eclipse project (for instance, Borland Software). Let’s let this cook for one more day. If the feedback continues as it has, I’ll simply withdraw the request. Like you, I am surprised at the disparity in usage of the abbreviated term – I rarely see EPL, and assumed that this suggestion would pass through the SPDX group as more of an FYI. Thanks again -- it is great to have community postings so the broadest view is represented. Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 toggle quoted message Show quoted text From: Mike Milinkovich [mailto:mike.milinkovich@...] Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:16 PM To: Tom Incorvia; spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@... Cc: 'SPDX' Subject: RE: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" Tom, FWIW, It is certainly news to me that people refer to the EPL as "Eclipse". I have universally heard it referred to as the EPL. I have literally never heard it referred to as Eclipse. I don't have a strong feeling about this one way or another. I just find it surprising that my experience is so contrary to yours. Mike Milinkovich Executive Director Eclipse Foundation, Inc. Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228 Mobile: +1.613.220.3223 mike.milinkovich@... blog: http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mike/ twitter: @mmilinkov From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Tom Incorvia Sent: February-29-12 4:00 PM To: spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@... Cc: SPDX Subject: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController.
More All Messages By This Member
Manbeck, Jack #525 I agree. I’m surprised someone didn’t recognize EPL (or even EDL which we probably need to add….). Could be they were not familiar with Eclipse? Jack toggle quoted message Show quoted text From: spdx-tech-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-tech-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Brian Fox Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:19 PM To: Tom Incorvia Cc: spdx-tech@...; spdx-legal@...; SPDX Subject: Re: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" In my circles it's more common to refer to it as EPL instead of Eclipse. In fact even the Eclipse foundation refers to it as EPL: http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Tom Incorvia <tom.incorvia@...> wrote: Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController. _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@... https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
More All Messages By This Member
Mike Milinkovich #524 Tom, FWIW, It is certainly news to me that people refer to the EPL as "Eclipse". I have universally heard it referred to as the EPL. I have literally never heard it referred to as Eclipse. I don't have a strong feeling about this one way or another. I just find it surprising that my experience is so contrary to yours. Mike Milinkovich Executive Director Eclipse Foundation, Inc. Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228 Mobile: +1.613.220.3223 mike.milinkovich@... blog: http://dev.eclipse.org/blogs/mike/ twitter: @mmilinkov toggle quoted message Show quoted text From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Tom Incorvia Sent: February-29-12 4:00 PM To: spdx-legal@...; spdx-tech@... Cc: SPDX Subject: Recommend Changing SPDX License Identifier for Eclipse Public License 1.0 to "Eclipse-1.0" Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController.
More All Messages By This Member
Brian Fox #531 In my circles it's more common to refer to it as EPL instead of Eclipse. In fact even the Eclipse foundation refers to it as EPL: http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Tom Incorvia <tom.incorvia@...> wrote: Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController. _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@... https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
More All Messages By This Member
Tom Incorvia #522 Hello SPDX license list interested parties, I would like to propose that we change the License Identifier for the Eclipse Public License 1.0 on the SPDX License List from “EPL-1.0” to “Eclipse-1.0”. I suggest this because “Eclipse” is how the license is commonly referred to. Secondarily, I have recently received 2 calls when documents referred to EPL-1.0, and the Identifier was simply not visually recognized by the user (yes, they could have clicked the link, but if Eclipse is the common usage, let’s go with it unless there is a cost). Any concerns? Thanks, Tom Tom Incorvia tom.incorvia@... Direct: (512) 340-1336 Mobile: (408) 499 6850 Shoretel (Internal): 27015 This message has been scanned by MailController.
More All Messages By This Member

1 - 6 of 6

1

Previous Topic Next Topic

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms