Hi, As far as I under stood the standard one would express this kind of association (file without license information - is assumed to be licensed under the "conluded" license of the package) with the following elements on file level: LicenseInfoInFile: NONE License concluded: SPDX Identifier of the "concluded" license of the package
Would it be possible to transfer the information from the SDPX file to the package. Meaning that those files will receive (or better to say: these files will be modified with) the Strings: LicenseInfoInFile: NONE License concluded: SPDX Identifier of the "concluded" license of the package This is just a suggestion Best Regards Oliver Fendt Siemens AG Corporate Technology Corporate Standards & Guidance CT CSG SWI OSS Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 81739 München, Deutschland Tel: +49 89 636-46033 mailto:oliver.fe...@siemens.com -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: spdx-tech-boun...@lists.spdx.org [mailto:spdx-tech-boun...@lists.spdx.org] Im Auftrag von Wolfgang Denk Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Dezember 2013 11:10 An: spdx-t...@lists.spdx.org; spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org Betreff: SPDX meta-tag for implicit license terms Hello, after converting the U-Boot project to use SPDX meta-tags, we now started working on another Open Source project; here we face a somewhat different situation: a large number of the individual source files do not contain any per-file license header at all. Instead, they rerely on the fact that they inherit the global, project-wide license as defined in the top level README and COPYING files. My understanding is that this is technically and legally clean as is. However, I see a handling problem here: the conversion of the project to use SPDX meta-tags will probably be an incremental process, and there will be some period of time (eventually even a long one) where still files exist that have not been converted yet. I would like to define a way to mark such files where implicit licensing applies, so that we do not have to check these again and again. Of course we could insert a license tag corresponding to the actual project-wide license, but such a modification is considered intrusive by some of affected people. I think it would be better (and easier acceptable by the respective copyright holders) to have some "neutral" SPDX meta-tag that reflects the fact that this file inherits the project's global license terms. Would such a meta-tag be acceptable to the SPDX team? I'm still looking for a good "name" for such a tag; suggestions we have so far include: SPDX-License-Identifier: implicit SPDX-License-Identifier: inherit SPDX-License-Identifier: none SPDX-License-Identifier: - Suggestions and comments welcome... Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de There is a time in the tides of men, Which, taken at its flood, leads on to success. On the other hand, don't count on it. - T. K. Lawson _______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list spdx-t...@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
