Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses?

2024-05-12 Thread J Lovejoy
Thanks Patrice - this was a good reminder that I should write up a longer explanation (rather than just pointing to the blog posts) as it is a question that comes up often enough to warrant recording a longer explanation. I thought I had put something in the FAQ, but don’t see it there. Will

Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses?

2024-05-02 Thread Patrice-Emmanuel SCHMITZ via lists.spdx.org
Dear Jilayne, My post was nothing personal; I can imagine how difficult it is to manage a community made up of many individuals and interests. All of us should be grateful for that and the decision to create these "-or-Later" identifiers was undoubtedly a collective one at the time, but as

Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses?

2024-05-02 Thread Karsten Klein
at 18:56 To: 'SPDX-legal' Subject: Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses? Resent-From: Resent-Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 09:56:55 -0700 I'm moving the SPDX general list to bcc, as this is really a topic for spdx-legal. In case anyone didn't see it

Re: [spdx] "-only" and "-or-later" identifiers for EUPL licenses?

2024-05-01 Thread J Lovejoy
I'm moving the SPDX general list to bcc, as this is really a topic for spdx-legal. In case anyone didn't see it and for context, my response to Christian that Patrice-Emmanuel references is on the spdx-legal thread and can be seen here: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3548 Some