meeting today and Re: issues that need input

2023-08-10 Thread J Lovejoy 

Hi all,

We have our regular call in about half hour at 
https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting


Please review the following issues to cover during the call:

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1992
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1944
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2043
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2055

The following need review, but I don't think they need discussion - please take 
time to contribute by reviewing as to whether they should be added to the SPDX 
License List

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2026  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2048  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2049
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2050
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2056

Thanks,
Jilayne

On 8/4/23 12:59 PM, J Lovejoy wrote:

Hi SPDX-legal,

We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, please 
contribute your valuable input! It’d be preferable if to all decisions were 
just Steve and I.

Reminder - for those license request issues with the label “used in major 
distro” - this means that the license has been determined to meet the free 
software license guidelines of either Debian or Fedora (or both) and is used in 
one of those distros, which also generally means the license meets two of the 
more important SPDX License inclusion guidelines. In this case, we 2 SPDX-legal 
members to review and approve for the license to be accepted.


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1992
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1944
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2026  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2039
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2042  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2043  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2048  (needs one more person to 
review)
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2049
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2050
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2055
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2056

Other issues that may implicate decisions about matching markup can be found at
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22XML+markup+change%22

Thanks,
Jilayne











-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#3441): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3441
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/100665621/21656
Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/leave/2655900/21656/2011363115/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: issues that need input

2023-08-10 Thread J Lovejoy 

Hi Ria,

The challenge of trying to contact the copyright holder re: changing the 
license is that often this is old code and being able to identify, let 
alone find the copyright holder could be difficult. Even if they were 
found and they did change the license, that would only be for new 
versions of the code, so the old versions would exist out there for some 
time, so the old license would still need to be addressed.


I wish it were easy, but I'm afraid not!

Jilayne

On 8/4/23 1:55 PM, Ria Schalnat (HPE) wrote:


Jilayne,

I wonder if rather than adding all these licenses to SPDX just because 
they happen to have some use in either Fedora/Debian if we could 
consider an extra external contact to the copyright holder on the 
chance they would be willing to relicense the code under something 
more standard (e.g., MIT/BSD/Apache/LGPL/GPL/etc.).  It just seems 
like a lot of extra work to review dozens of licenses that are 
variations on already existing ones and then set up the appropriate 
files for detection & etc.


If we are talking about a single copyright holder, this shouldn't be 
much more difficult than tracking down a license steward to confirm 
the language is stable (which we already do ... and for these bespoke 
licenses, they may be one and the same) - if there are multiple 
contributors then I can see it being a bottomless pit but it seems 
like this could be a way to "corral" the sprawl of licenses that might 
serve the community better than having a bunch of random licenses in 
SPDX.


Please let me know if I’m retreading old ground here – I may not have 
been around for past conversations on this topic!


Best regards,

/Ria Farrell Schalnat/(she/her)**

Text Description automatically generated with low confidence

-Original Message-
From: Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org  On Behalf 
Of J Lovejoy

Sent: Friday, August 4, 2023 12:00 PM
To: SPDX-legal 
Subject: issues that need input

Hi SPDX-legal,

We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, 
please contribute your valuable input! It’d be preferable if to all 
decisions were just Steve and I.


Reminder - for those license request issues with the label “used in 
major distro” - this means that the license has been determined to 
meet the free software license guidelines of either Debian or Fedora 
(or both) and is used in one of those distros, which also generally 
means the license meets two of the more important SPDX License 
inclusion guidelines. In this case, we 2 SPDX-legal members to review 
and approve for the license to be accepted.


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1992 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1944 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2026 
 (needs one more 
person to review)


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2039 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2042 
 (needs one more 
person to review)


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2043 
 (needs one more 
person to review)


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2048 
 (needs one more 
person to review)


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2049 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2050 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2055 



https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2056 



Other issues that may implicate decisions about matching markup can be 
found at


https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22XML+markup+change%22 



Thanks,

Jilayne





-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#3440): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3440
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/100552560/21656
Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/leave/2655900/21656/2011363115/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: issues that need input

2023-08-04 Thread Ria Schalnat (HPE) 
Jilayne,



I wonder if rather than adding all these licenses to SPDX just because they 
happen to have some use in either Fedora/Debian if we could consider an extra 
external contact to the copyright holder on the chance they would be willing to 
relicense the code under something more standard (e.g., 
MIT/BSD/Apache/LGPL/GPL/etc.).  It just seems like a lot of extra work to 
review dozens of licenses that are variations on already existing ones and then 
set up the appropriate files for detection & etc.



If we are talking about a single copyright holder, this shouldn't be much more 
difficult than tracking down a license steward to confirm the language is 
stable (which we already do ... and for these bespoke licenses, they may be one 
and the same) - if there are multiple contributors then I can see it being a 
bottomless pit but it seems like this could be a way to "corral" the sprawl of 
licenses that might serve the community better than having a bunch of random 
licenses in SPDX.



Please let me know if I’m retreading old ground here – I may not have been 
around for past conversations on this topic!



Best regards,


Ria Farrell Schalnat (she/her)
[Text  Description automatically generated with low confidence]

-Original Message-
From: Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org  On Behalf Of J 
Lovejoy
Sent: Friday, August 4, 2023 12:00 PM
To: SPDX-legal 
Subject: issues that need input



Hi SPDX-legal,



We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, please 
contribute your valuable input! It’d be preferable if to all decisions were 
just Steve and I.



Reminder - for those license request issues with the label “used in major 
distro” - this means that the license has been determined to meet the free 
software license guidelines of either Debian or Fedora (or both) and is used in 
one of those distros, which also generally means the license meets two of the 
more important SPDX License inclusion guidelines. In this case, we 2 SPDX-legal 
members to review and approve for the license to be accepted.





https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1992

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1944

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2026 (needs one more person to 
review)

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2039

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2042 (needs one more person to 
review)

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2043 (needs one more person to 
review)

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2048 (needs one more person to 
review)

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2049

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2050

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2055

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2056



Other issues that may implicate decisions about matching markup can be found at

https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22XML+markup+change%22



Thanks,

Jilayne


















-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#3439): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3439
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/100552560/21656
Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/unsub 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-