Ah, you're talking about the full SPDX spec. That is a completely
different beast. I don't know of anyone using that right now...
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
> Yes, that's the custom and/or rule I mentioned. This is not the SPDX license
>
Yes, that's the custom and/or rule I mentioned. This is not the SPDX
license expression format:
https://spdx.org/spdx-specification-21-web-version
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> No, you're not missing something. AppStream doesn't really have a
> great
No, you're not missing something. AppStream doesn't really have a
great way to represent custom licenses. But license expressions are
supported, as you can see in this example[1]. I suspect the "proper"
way to handle it would be to have the license bundled in the metadata
when "Custom" or
SUSE has their own list of non-standard references[1], but my
understanding is that SPDX is working on making this a bit more
flexible in this regard. This was one of the reasons we haven't
switched to it in Fedora (the other being the mismatch of BSD/MIT tags
to SPDX equivalents). AppStream
That's an interesting idea. Is there a known repository for license texts
which are not standard? I see SPDX uses a LicenseRef- kind of
reference, but it's not clear what that is referencing. Just another field
inside the XML in the case of AppStream, I suppose?
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:58 PM,
On 26/01/17 23:58, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
>> We should allow a plaintext field there for this situation. Yes, go
>> ahead with "Other open source".
>>
> It would probably make sense to support SPDX license tags and
>
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
>
> We should allow a plaintext field there for this situation. Yes, go
> ahead with "Other open source".
>
It would probably make sense to support SPDX license tags and
expressions[1]. This is used in AppStream, so a
We should allow a plaintext field there for this situation. Yes, go
ahead with "Other open source".
On 26/01/17 22:14, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm just about to upload the ldc2 snap, but have one last question
> first. LDC itself is released under the terms of the BSD