On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Chris Larson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Andrei Gherzan <[email protected]> wrote: >> No worries. Anyway, you are right about the "+" mechanism but right now this >> is a fast and complete solution. > > Indeed, nice work on this.
Agreed! One note about "+". There is still a discussion about "or greater" licensing within the SPDX community about how "or greater" should be dealt with. http://www.spdx.org/wiki/proposal-2010-11-16-1-or-later-version-licensing https://bugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591 I'm partial to, as a stop gap, re-including L/GPL-x.0+ license files into common-licenses until they hash it out and treating "+" as just part of the license name. It's not a perfect solution but it should solve most "or greater" use cases. -b > -- > Christopher Larson > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- Elizabeth Flanagan Yocto Project Build and Release _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
