Re: License field
François-René ÐVB Rideau écrivait: > I was considering just a string for now FWIW, I'm also in favor of strings. Using symbols is risky for case-sensitiveness. -- My new Jazz CD entitled "Roots and Leaves" is out! Check it out: http://didierverna.com/records/roots-and-leaves.php Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
Re: License field
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Robert Goldman <rpgold...@sift.net> wrote: > On 10/16/15 Oct 16 -2:03 PM, Faré wrote: >> I propose we document that the license field should if possible >> contain an identifier from >> http://spdx.org/licenses/ >> http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6867 > > Do you expect this field to be a string, or should it be encoded in some > special way (e.g., a keyword representation of the identifier)? > > If we do the latter, we could check it but (a) this would bloat ASDF > further and (b) it would incur a maintenance debt in perpetuity as the > set of SPDX identifiers changes. > > One more question: What if the software is NOT open source? > I was considering just a string for now, as has always been. Then a linter could go over the packages in Quicklisp and check that they are all open source with a proper SPDX license string. For closed source code, I don't know — probably "Proprietary" or something would do — or just anything not valid per SPDX. —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection• http://fare.tunes.org ...so this guy walks into a bar. "The usual, Mr. Descartes?" the barman asked. "I think not," Rene replied, and promptly disappeared.
Re: License field
On 10/16/15 Oct 16 -2:03 PM, Faré wrote: > I propose we document that the license field should if possible > contain an identifier from > http://spdx.org/licenses/ > http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6867 Do you expect this field to be a string, or should it be encoded in some special way (e.g., a keyword representation of the identifier)? If we do the latter, we could check it but (a) this would bloat ASDF further and (b) it would incur a maintenance debt in perpetuity as the set of SPDX identifiers changes. One more question: What if the software is NOT open source? Cheers, r
Re: License field
François-René ÐVB Rideau écrivait: > I propose we document that the license field should if possible > contain an identifier from > http://spdx.org/licenses/ > http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6867 Good idea, although it seems to be missing the GNU All Permissive license (the submission process looks quite cumbersome). -- My new Jazz CD entitled "Roots and Leaves" is out! Check it out: http://didierverna.com/records/roots-and-leaves.php Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
Re: License field
J'écrivais: > Good idea, although it seems to be missing the GNU All Permissive > license (the submission process looks quite cumbersome). Ended up doing it anyway. -- My new Jazz CD entitled "Roots and Leaves" is out! Check it out: http://didierverna.com/records/roots-and-leaves.php Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
Re: License field
On 10/16/15 Oct 16 -2:03 PM, Faré wrote: > I propose we document that the license field should if possible > contain an identifier from > http://spdx.org/licenses/ > http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6867 > > —♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection• http://fare.tunes.org > You think you know when you can learn, are more sure when you can write, > even more when you can teach, but certain when you can program. > — Alan Perlis > I like this idea, but I'm going to push it out past 3.1.6. Starting to work on the release chores now...
