Hello Russ,
Thank you for working on this.
On Sat 09 Sep 2023 at 08:35pm -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
> the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
> what I would do if the decision was entirely
On Sat, 2023-09-09 at 20:35 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
> following criteria:
>
> * The license is DFSG-free.
> * Exactly the same license wording is used by all works covered by it.
> * The license applies
Quoting Russ Allbery (2023-09-10 21:41:59)
> Jeremy Stanley writes:
>
> > I'm surprised, for example, by the absence of the ISC license given that
> > not only ISC's software but much of that originating from the OpenBSD
> > ecosystem uses it. My personal software projects also use the ISC
> >
* Russ Allbery [2023-09-10 09:16]:
In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
what I would do if the decision was entirely up to me:
Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they
Jeremy Stanley writes:
> I'm surprised, for example, by the absence of the ISC license given that
> not only ISC's software but much of that originating from the OpenBSD
> ecosystem uses it. My personal software projects also use the ISC
> license. Are you aggregating the "License:" field in
On 2023-09-09 20:35:27 -0700 (-0700), Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
> Finally, as promised, here is the count of source packages in
> unstable that use the set of licenses that I taught my script to
> look for. This is likely not accurate; the script uses a bunch of
> heuristics and guesswork.
[...]
Quoting Russ Allbery (2023-09-10 18:16:07)
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
> > In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
> > the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
> > what I would do if the decision was entirely up to me:
>
> >
Russ Allbery writes:
> In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
> the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
> what I would do if the decision was entirely up to me:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> Quoting Hideki Yamane (2023-09-10 11:00:07)
>> Hmm, how about providing license-common package and that depends on
>> "license-common-list", and ISO image provides both, then? It would be
>> no regressions.
I do wonder why we've never done this. Does anyone know?
On Sun, 10 Sept 2023 at 04:36, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
> following criteria:
>
> * The license is DFSG-free.
> * Exactly the same license wording is used by all works covered by it.
> * The license applies to
Quoting Hideki Yamane (2023-09-10 11:00:07)
> On Sat, 09 Sep 2023 22:41:48 -0700
> Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > How about just pointing SPDX licenses URL for whole license text and
> > > lists DFSG-free licenses from that? (but yes, we should adjust short
> > > name of licenses for DEP-5 and SPDX
On Sep 10, Enrico Zini wrote:
> I like this. I'd say that even if a license is shorter than 25 lines I'd
> appreciate to be able to link to it instead of copypasting it.
Me too.
> I like to be able to fill the license field with a value, after checking
> that the upstream license didn't diverge
On Sat, 09 Sep 2023 22:41:48 -0700
Russ Allbery wrote:
> > How about just pointing SPDX licenses URL for whole license text and
> > lists DFSG-free licenses from that? (but yes, we should adjust short
> > name of licenses for DEP-5 and SPDX for it).
>
> Can we do this legally? If we can, it
Hideki Yamane writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
>> following criteria:
> How about just pointing SPDX licenses URL for whole license text and
> lists DFSG-free licenses from that? (but yes, we should adjust short
>
On Sat, Sep 09, 2023 at 08:35:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
> following criteria:
>
> * The license is DFSG-free.
> * Exactly the same license wording is used by all works covered by it.
> * The license
On Sat, 09 Sep 2023 20:35:27 -0700
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Licenses will be included in common-licenses if they meet all of the
> following criteria:
How about just pointing SPDX licenses URL for whole license text and
lists DFSG-free licenses from that? (but yes, we should adjust short
Quoting Russ Allbery (2023-09-10 05:35:27)
> In order to structure the discussion and prod people into thinking about
> the implications, I will make the following straw man proposal. This is
> what I would do if the decision was entirely up to me:
>
> Licenses will be included in
17 matches
Mail list logo
