I just wanted to add this before waiting for general feedback on the thread:
https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 14:16:42 +0100 (CET), <[email protected]> wrote: > Reading into general licenses we use, I found that simply stating "public > domain" > is considered "controversial" enough for the FSF to recommend CC0 now. I have > no strong preference over the presented alternatives (CC0, 0BSD, etc) but > would > make files which are not just Makefiles state 0BSD. For myself 0BSD seems more > appropriate for what we have and is more to the point, less "intimidating" for > people who don't use license texts on a daily/regular basis. > > Compare https://opensource.org/licenses/0BSD > (https://tldrlegal.com/license/bsd-0-clause-license) > with > https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode > (https://tldrlegal.com/license/creative-commons-cc0-1.0-universal) > > As neither Trademarks nor Patents apply for the files we put in the public > domain and our > project, 0BSD seems better because it can be processed easier by humans > (which also > relates to this thread intention). > > On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 00:10:57 +0100 (CET), <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 23:45:52 +0100, Tirifto <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ng0 píše v So 12. 01. 2019 v 18:43 +0100: > > > > Hi *, and happy new year! > > > > > > Hello and to you as well! > > > > > > > Hi *, and happy new year! > > > > > > > > A while back I've talked to someone about SPDX ( > > > > https://spdx.org/about) and the purpose of it. > > > > Since it doesn't add any damage, and it helps humans as well as > > > > programs who need to parse files for copyleft/rights, I want to > > > > discuss how my patch should look like to add this to gnunet core. > > > > I will adjust the rest of our repositories after core is done. It > > > > would be good to adjust Taler repositories as well. > > > > > > > > You have a good amount of freedom in how to apply spdx. > > > > > > > > Practical example, pleroma (AGPL3-only software), has this header: > > > > > > > > # Pleroma: A lightweight social networking server > > > > # Copyright © 2017-2019 Pleroma Authors <https://pleroma.social/> > > > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3.0-only > > > > > > > > and includes the normal "LICENSE" file in their root. > > > > > > > > Next example. Linux (https://lwn.net/Articles/739183/) is using a > > > > mechanism which supports the software making use of spdx. If you read > > > > into their current source tree you see that they have a folder > > > > 'LICENSES' which contains license specifications according to their > > > > rules: > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.18/process/license-rules.html > > > > > > > > There are applications to help with the process, but I haven't looked > > > > into them yet. > > > > > > > > We have a number of options here: > > > > 1. Do as pleroma does. cut down the license part of the header to the > > > > necessary parts. > > > > 2. Add SPDX as an addition to our current header, no removal. > > > > 3. Look more closely into what Linux has done. > > > > 4. Ignore spdx. > > > > > > > > I'm in favor of 2 and would also go for 1 if people found it > > > > reasonable. > > > > > > I would like to bring the REUSE Initiative to your attention, which was > > > launched a while back, by Free Software Foundation Europe, to provide a > > > set of practices for including machine-readable licensing information > > > in source code. It's a superset of SPDX, if my understanding's correct. > > > > > > https://reuse.software/ > > > > > > Not sure how you'll find it, but I thought it was relevant to mention. > > > > > > Best wishes > > > // Tirifto > > > > Ah, yes. reuse.software was one of the examples pointed out to me > > in conversation. Thanks for reminding me of it, I forgot to mention it. > > _______________________________________________ > > GNUnet-developers mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > > > > _______________________________________________ > GNUnet-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers _______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
