[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6677?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16861468#comment-16861468
]
Vladimir Sitnikov commented on MNG-6677:
----------------------------------------
{quote}This still does not the id of the license in the list. {quote}
The point of <licenseExpression> field is to provide machine-readable meaning.
In other words, it is intentional that I don't put "Tomcat BSD-Style License"
to expression.
Does that answer the question?
PS. We could just have a small conversation over zoom/hangout if you think that
would be faster.
PPS. I do get the topic is complicated, and I'm really sorry it takes time to
type/read :-/
PPPS. All this thread appeared for me when I was trying to verify third-party
licenses for Apache JMeter.
> Ability to declare machine-readable license identifier for project
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MNG-6677
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6677
> Project: Maven
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: POM
> Affects Versions: 3.6.1
> Reporter: Vladimir Sitnikov
> Priority: Major
>
> Current model for license is something, yet it is not machine-friendly.
> Developers tend to put random data into
> {{<license><name>...</name><url>...</url>}}, and it is hard to analyze in
> automatic way.
> What if we could use SPDX license identifiers/expressions for license
> information?
> Note: currently POM allows to list multiple <license> tags, and it is not
> clear how they should be treated (and? or?). So a machine-readable field
> should probably allow for AND/OR license expressions.
> So it would be nice if there was a way to declare a machine-readable license
> tag.
> I'm not affiliated with SPDX, however OSGi use those ids:
> https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.core/7.0.0/framework.module.html#framework.module-bundle-license
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
