Hi Jilayne,
once in a while I come back with my yet informal proposal to treat new licenses
in two stages:
Stage 1 - Registration
Register a license text providing a unique name and short id. (New)
Registration guidelines only make sure no other SPDX license is duplicated /
affected.
This
My vote is for #1 - The SPDX tools only uses the released license lists. If
someone uses an ID before it is released, it may not pass validation.
I'm OK with #2 with the understanding that other tools may not understand the
license ID's until the release.
I'm very much not in favor of #3, -
Hi all,
I just made a new issue to capture this, but wanted to raise it here for
broader discussion.
If we say that all OSI-approved are included on the SPDX License List, would we
want to extend this to licenses that have been deemed to meet the Debian Free
Software Guidelines, Fedora
Hi all,
>From our last call, the subject of 'when can people start using short ids? ‘
>came up. This has been asked before on individual license submissions and we
>have answered informally, but it might be helpful to have a more official
>stance and document it somewhere.
The options I can
Hi again,
Now that 2.3 is out, this question is more pertinent:
Note, if I want to link to a specific part of the SPDX spec, I can find it via
the HTML format, for example:
https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/license-matching-guidelines-and-templates/
