On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 5:52 PM Jilayne Lovejoy <[email protected]> wrote: > > yes, the change of SPDX identifiers from GPL-2.0 to represent GPL-2.0 only > and GPL-2.0+ (by way of adding the + operator) to represent GPL-2.0 or later > to > a license-specific listings on the SPDX License List of: > GPL-2.0-only and GPL-2.0-or-later > > was due to pressure from the FSF back in 2017 or 2018. You can read blog > posts about it and the rationale if you want. > > I suspect that prior to that, tool makers and others used "GPL-2.0" to > mean: the specific text of the license itself, I'm not sure if it's > "only" or "or later"; and just only that version. Which is what the FSF > didn't like. > > One of the proposals that the SPDX community came up with at that time > was to have GPL-2.0 mean that text of the license itself or I'm not sure > if it's "only" or "or later" and then add an operator to the license > expression syntax that meant "only" (along the lines of + meaning "or > later"). This would have been much easier for license scanning tools to > consume. But that solution was rejected by the FSF. > > Sometimes community leadership is hard.
If I could make a suggestion to the SPDX legal team: adopt a rule or guiding principle that "license stewards are not stakeholders". :) Richard _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
