Hi, 2017-11-11 22:21 GMT+01:00 Jonas Oberg <[email protected]>: > I wouldn't do that now. Adding SPDX license identifiers is in most cases > quite sufficient and something which I would encourage first. > > What you mention about the LICENSES/ folder and the License-Filename > tag (which can be repeated) is an addition which is a bit more specific, > especially for BSD licenses where the SPDX license identifier alone does > not convey information about the specific "attribution requirement" of > each licensor. > > Most often though, as you find the BSD licenses in the source code headers, > we wouldn't want the license text separated from them, and it would be > contrary to the REUSE principles to do so.
Thank you for the fast reply. Just as summary: 1. SPDX license identifier first 2. Full BSD/MIT/ISC license in source files is sufficient and don't require License-Filename 3. verbatim licenses which are not in source files (GPL, LGPL, MPL, ...) should be in LICENSES/ 4. License-Filename tag can be added later and multiple are allowed per file If this understanding is correct then I would still propose that the LICENSES folder is prepared with the previously identified long licenses (which are currently not stored completely in the source files): mkdir LICENSES curl -o LICENSES/GPL-1.0.txt https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-1.0.txt curl -o LICENSES/GPL-2.0.txt https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.txt curl -o LICENSES/MPL-1.1.txt https://www.mozilla.org/media/MPL/1.1/index.0c5913925d40.txt curl -o LICENSES/LGPL-2.0.txt https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.0.txt curl -o LICENSES/LGPL-2.1.txt https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.txt $EDITOR COPYING # change file to reference LICENSES/GPL-2.0.txt ? git add LICENSES COPYING git commit Thanks, Charlemagne Lasse
