meeting at top of the hour

Hi all, We have our regular SPDX-legal meeting at the top of the hour. Please have a look at the following two issues marked for discussion: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2390 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2424 We currently have about 50 open issues for the

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

Hello Christian and welcome! There is a long story behind the change to the GNU licenses that you see today that I won’t bore you with, but you can get a summary here: https://spdx.dev/license-list-3-0-released/ (which has links to other related articles). The license expression syntax still

meeting tomorrow and some issues to review

Hi all, I meant to send an updated list of issues but it sat in my draft box for too long... Let's look at the following issue during our call tomorrow: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2343 https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2390

legal call in an hour

Hi all, Hopefully you all are getting the automatic reminders for the calls now! In any case, we have a call in an hour. I have not had time to get an updated list of issues out, but have seen some activity (yeah!) so we will have a look at what needs addressing.  I believe Miroslav, who had

Re: SPDX license for Public Domain works?

Hi all, Just to take a step back for a minute: requesting some kind of generic public domain dedication be added to the SPDX License List has come up a few times. We wrote up this explanation to address this (so we didn't have to repeat it!). See

Re: issues to review - March 18th

Thanks to Karsten, Mary, Warner, and Steve for weighing on some of these and helping move things along! Here's a revised list! Need help on naming mostly: * https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2326 - Sun - need help on naming *

Re: issues to review - March 14th

who might be familiar with this? Thanks! Jilayne > On Mar 1, 2024, at 5:18 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > > Hi All, > > I've updated the list below - still needs attention to close out, but thanks > to Karsten for adding some info regarding naming and other background to some >

meeting in half hour

Hi All, Just a quick reminder that we have our normal SPDX-legal call in about half an hour. For those of you outside of the US, this may be a different time than usual due to the US "springing" our clocks forward already. I've been a bit behind myself, but we will focus on working through

Re: issues to review - March 1st

match: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/license-match.md - PR pending for updates to https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/2416/files Please help out with the issues listed below! Thanks, Jilayne On 2/15/24 3:22 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, Here is a list

Re: XML format is unsatisfactory

Hi all, I'm a bit late to this thread, but wanted to add a few bits to what others have said. First of all, Gary's brief history of the SPDX License List format reminded me that we ought to document this, as it does provide some context on how we got here. Turns out the timing was mostly

Re: Event: SPDX-legal call (4th Thurs of month) - Thursday, February 22, 2024 #cal-reminder

Agenda: 1) As per our discussion last call re: improving documentation and tips for contributing, I've started to make some revisions. Notably, I began a document on tips for reviewing licenses here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/review.md It's a work-in-progress,

issues to review - Feb 15th edition

Hi all, Here is a list of issues to review: I've just put links, but tried to group them by what kind of review is needed, hoping that's helpful for people! *"used in major distro" licenses - Need one more person to review (and possibly input on id):*

Re: Issues to review / Call on Jan 25th

- https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2323 - add markup, see comments in issue Thanks, Jilayne On 1/18/24 10:51 AM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal, Here is a list of issues that could use review. Please remember, this is not exhaustive! Any issue that does not have PR

Issues to review

Hi SPDX-legal, Here is a list of issues that could use review. Please remember, this is not exhaustive! Any issue that does not have PR associated with it, is fair game for review and comments! Openwall crypt - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2262 - needs additional person to

Re: call Thurs, Jan 11th and other updates

yeah yeah, Thursday is the 11th! On 1/10/24 10:11 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, You should have gotten meeting invites for the 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month for 2024 (starting tomorrow!). I sent it via the mailing list and it should also send an automatic reminder - yeah!  Note, you can

call Thurs, Jan 10th and other updates

Hi all, You should have gotten meeting invites for the 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month for 2024 (starting tomorrow!). I sent it via the mailing list and it should also send an automatic reminder - yeah!  Note, you can always access the calendar in the mailing list interface at

HNY and priority issues to review

Happy New Year SPDX-legal community! Well, didn't quite get to clearing out issues the last couple weeks of December, but really hoping we can hit the ground running for the upcoming release at the end of this month! Please see the list of priority issues below for review. Also, our next

licenses to review

Hi all, As promised during our call last week, here is a list of licenses to review. The first set just need one more person to confirm acceptance and thoughts on naming: HPND with MIT disclaimer - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2228 Veillard -

call today at noon ET

Hi all, Sorry for the last minute reminder, but we will have our last call of 2023 today!! I know everyone is busy, but I still would like to make it a goal to close out most of the current issues in the next week. If everyone commits to look at 3 issues each, I think we can get there!

issues to review

HI all, I know we didn’t have a call last week due to the holiday, but we need to keep up some momentum before we get to the end of the year!! The list below still needs input: > On Nov 9, 2023, at 9:52 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > 3d-slicer - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issue

Re: issues to review, meeting Thursday

Here's an updated list of issues to look at after today's legal call! * 3d-slicer - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2213 - can someone do a full write-up using the template on this one? * Kevlin Henney - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2206 - another

issues to review, meeting Thursday

Hi all, Sorry I’ve been MIA - had some travel, been busy, etc. But the licenses keep coming in, so we have lots of work to do before the end of November! We have our regular meeting tomorrow/Thursday at noon US eastern time - reminder: the US set its clocks back, so if you are outside the US,

Re: new documentation and licenses that need review

sorry, our next meeting is next week, Oct 26th! > On Oct 17, 2023, at 12:39 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > > Hi all, > > As discussed on our last call, I updated (and merged) a new document to help > with determining if a license matches something already on the SPDX License &

new documentation and licenses that need review

Hi all, As discussed on our last call, I updated (and merged) a new document to help with determining if a license matches something already on the SPDX License List. Have a look at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/license-match.md and add comments to the related issue

meeting today

Sorry this is last minute, but we have our regular meeting at the top of the hour. Since we just got a release out, I was thinking we could talk for a bit about some better documentation to help with reviewing licenses - have a look at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/2118 which

open issues - call Thursday

Hi all, In preparation for our call tomorrow/this morning, please have a look at the following. Call is at noon Eastern US time, at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting A few of these may just need another set of eyeballs and comment and do not need to be discussed. We will use the time on

Re: Licenses to review (9/20)

pdx/license-list-XML/issues/2152 - possible XML markup? - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2142 - additional markup? Thanks! Jilayne On Sep 13, 2023, at 9:30 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, In preparation for our call on Thursday, 9/14 at noon Eastern US time, I’m including

Licenses to review:

/license-list-XML/issues/2141 - Furuseth - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2140 - Adobe-typeface - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2121 Thanks! Jilayne > On Sep 13, 2023, at 9:30 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > > Hi all, > > In preparation for our call on

call Thursday, issues to resolve!

Hi all, In preparation for our call on Thursday, 9/14 at noon Eastern US time, I’m including a list of the issues I’d like for us to tackle by the end of the call. Yes, you read that right and yes, it is a long list! However, the first section of the list has already been reviewed and

issues to review 9/8 edition

easier to see the differences in the Google doc) As mentioned in my previous email, I’ll have an update on the “HPND” variants (of which we now have 8!) after I do an initial review of them in bulk. Thanks! Jilayne > On Sep 7, 2023, at 10:27 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > > Thanks to Ria f

issues to review 9/7

and look forward to a productive session tomorrow!! Jilayne > On Sep 6, 2023, at 9:41 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: > > Revised list below. Please have a look and comment as to acceptance or not > to the SPDX License List on as many as possible > prior to our (new!) quarterly working se

issues to review 9/6

Revised list below. Please have a look and comment as to acceptance or not to the SPDX License List on as many as possible prior to our (new!) quarterly working session on Friday :) There are more issues than these, but this is a start! Note: Fedora has 31 issues that are “blocked” on SPDX -

issues to review 8/27

Hi all, Here is a list of issues that need review: * MPEG - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2049 * pnmstitch - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2046 * glibc startup code exception - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2055 * HPLIP -

call Thursday, topics

Hi all, I was hoping to get a new list of issues to review out prior to this, but time slipped away from me! For Thursday's meeting, I'd like to focus on the issues labeled "XML markup change" - please have a look at the following

SPDX-legal meeting invites

No worries James! These weird things happen! This is a good opportunity to remind people that we have the meeting details here https://github.com/spdx/meetings#legal-team-meetings — including a link to the .ics files for each set of meetings - one for the second Thursday of the month and one

Re: SUSE Open Source project for the SPDX tool list

Hi Sebastian, Thanks for the update! I'm copying the SPDX-legal team as well, as I think many people there might be interested in this. I had actually tried to learn more about Cavil a year or so ago - both from the perspective on my role with SPDX and to see how the license ids were being

meeting today and Re: issues that need input

, Jilayne On 8/4/23 12:59 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal, We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, please contribute your valuable input! It’d be preferable if to all decisions were just Steve and I. Reminder - for those license request issues with the label “used

Re: issues that need input

iginal Message- From: Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org On Behalf Of J Lovejoy Sent: Friday, August 4, 2023 12:00 PM To: SPDX-legal Subject: issues that need input Hi SPDX-legal, We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, please contribute your valuable input! It’d be prefer

issues that need input

Hi SPDX-legal, We currently have 24 license requests that need review. Links below, please contribute your valuable input! It’d be preferable if to all decisions were just Steve and I. Reminder - for those license request issues with the label “used in major distro” - this means that the

Re: Discussing Change Proposal regarding DataLicense / CC0-1.0

Just want to reiterate that we have an SPDX-legal call tomorrow and will be discussion the Change Proposal related to data license. Please see Steve's summary below and associated links and come prepared! Thanks, Jilayne On 7/14/23 12:16 PM, Steve Winslow wrote: Hello spdx-legal and

Re: update Re: current issues - meeting Thursday

Hi folks, Can we get some comments on these? Would be nice to get them accepted and start working on files. Thanks, Jilayne On 7/13/23 1:36 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Thanks for the productive call today! I'm revising the list below of issues that need input :) The following licenses have

update Re: current issues - meeting Thursday

n - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2011 Thanks! Jilayne On 7/11/23 5:07 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, A quick reminder that we have our SPDX-legal meeting coming up on Thursday at noon Eastern time at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting The monthly general call wi

current issues - meeting Thursday

Hi all, A quick reminder that we have our SPDX-legal meeting coming up on Thursday at noon Eastern time at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting The monthly general call will be just prior. We have a bunch of new licenses and other issues that need review - please have a look and comment in

Re: [spdx-implementers] vs. in XML?

Hi there, First thanks for checking in on this before making a pull request! The short answer is no, please do not do this because these have distinct meanings and are not equivalent. Looks like Gary has already responded on the spdx-implementers list, but the other resource that would be

meeting tomorrow (thursday) at noon Eastern US time

Hi All, Big thanks to Steve for pushing the 3.21 before going on vacation! For tomorrow, I'd like to spend a bit of time on the following items, please have a look in advance! https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1773 - this needs another person to weigh in (Steve and I already

meeting Thursday and license/issues that need review

. If there are things to discuss we can do so then. See list below. Thanks, Jilayne On 6/1/23 5:40 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal, Please help review and comment on the following license submissions. Keep in mind the license inclusion guidelines at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob

license/issues that need review - June 1

Hi SPDX-legal, Please help review and comment on the following license submissions. Keep in mind the license inclusion guidelines at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/license-inclusion-principles.md Japan Gov't Terms of Use 2.0:

meeting tomorrow, various updates

Hi all, Reminder we have our regular SPDX-legal meeting tomorrow at noon US eastern time at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting As for agenda: 1) We will have Vedant Jolly - our GSoC student working on improvements and increased functionality for the SPDX license submission tool. You can

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

these have different meanings? J. *From:*J Lovejoy *Sent:* Wednesday, May 24, 2023 2:15 PM *To:* mc...@lexpan.law; 'SPDX-legal' *Subject:* Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora) On 5/9/23 12:34 PM, McCoy Smith wrote: FWIW, maybe this is an opportunity

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

work in practice. That is, unless I've missed something in #4's description. agree with Warner and Philippe's later comment about losing traceability Jilayne On May 8, 2023, at 11:34 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal Some time ago, I raised the issue of the poss

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

imilar way that a license id now represents a concrete, individual license Thanks, Mary *From:* Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org *On Behalf Of *Ria Schalnat (HPE) via lists.spdx.org *Sent:* Tuesday, May 9, 2023 9:11 PM *To:* Richard Fontana ; mc...@lexpan.law *Cc:* J Lovejoy ; SPDX-legal *Subject:* [EX

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

On 5/10/23 2:00 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: On Tue, 2023-05-09 at 22:37 -0400, Richard Fontana wrote: On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 2:38 PM McCoy Smith wrote: FWIW, maybe this is an opportunity for SPDX to lead? Most of these look similar, but not the same. I’m guessing a lot of the similar ones

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

ng the same identifier, which could be an issue downstream. see question above re: if we could safely lump at least some together? *From:*Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org *On Behalf Of *J Lovejoy *Sent:* Monday, May 8, 2023 8:34 PM *To:* 'SPDX-legal' *Subject:* public domain dedication variants in

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

On 5/9/23 10:56 AM, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: Hi Jilayne: On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 5:34 AM J Lovejoy wrote: Some time ago, I raised the issue of the possibility of finding a proliferation of "public domain "dedication" texts in the course of Fedora reviewing package licens

Re: public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

Thanks for the various feedback on this, everyone! Responding in order... see below On 5/8/23 10:43 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, May 8, 2023, 9:34 PM J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal Some time ago, I raised the issue of the possibility of finding a proliferation of "p

Re: License list navigation menu item removal

I also agree with Alexios' and Steve's comments below! Jilayne On 5/22/23 9:55 AM, Steve Winslow wrote: I agree with Alexios' comments in this thread. I would not be in favor of “hiding” the license list in the licensing profile. I think the SPDX License List is broadly used across the

3.21 release timing

Hi all, As many of you are aware, we delayed the 3.21 release due to other priorities, particularly the 3.0 release candidate. Steve and I discussed various scheduling realities and wanted to let you all know that we will aim for the first week of June for the 3.21 release, so please keep

Re: Request for Feedback on Proposal

Thanks Vedant!  We are very excited to have you participate in our community! Vedant will be joining the SPDX-legal call on Thursday, May 25th to discuss his proposal, get to know us, and hear any other input about your experiences with using the SPDX Online License Submission Tool (we

Re: licenses to review or comment on

: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1971 On 5/15/23 10:43 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, If we could get some other eyes on the following license requests, that would be great! another Latex2e variation: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1947 - I think this is an easy

licenses to review or comment on

Hi all, If we could get some other eyes on the following license requests, that would be great! another Latex2e variation: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1947 - I think this is an easy addition, but need another vote or two additional markup that I think we should add, but

Reminder meeting May17th: Fedora Legal - SPDX Hackfest

Hi SPDX-legal, As mentioned previously, the Fedora hackfest was rescheduled to this coming Wednesday, May 17th. It'd be great to have a couple more SPDX-legal folks there to, perhaps, review-live any potential new licenses. I think it will also be generally insightful as to licensing and

call now (re: 3.0 licensing profile)

Hi all, Steve sent a reminder on Monday, but in case people missed getting a more typical last minute reminder, we are meeting now! Jilayne -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3375): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3375

public domain dedication variants in the wild (found in Fedora)

Hi SPDX-legal Some time ago, I raised the issue of the possibility of finding a proliferation of "public domain "dedication" texts in the course of Fedora reviewing package license info to adopt SPDX ids. Please see https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/topic/93048752#3202 for the background

Re: Reminder: Change Proposal on custom license exceptions / modifiers / additions

Hi all, I’ve added some comments to https://github.com/spdx/change-proposal/issues/4 and am looking forward to coming to a conclusion on our first official use of the Change Proposal process at tomorrow’s meeting (and apologies to Alexios that

Re: Upcoming Fedora Legal hackfest - converting to SPDX IDs

Hi all, We/Fedora have rescheduled the ELN Hackfest for Wednesday, May 17th.  Same time and meeting info as below. I'll send a reminder a few days out. Sorry for the last minute notice! Cheers, Jilayne On 4/17/23 11:53 AM, J Lovejoy wrote: Time corrections from the original announcement

licenses that need review

Hi all, Especially since we have the Change Proposal to discuss on this week's call, it'd be great if we could move some license requests forward outside of a meeting :) Issues that need additional reviewers: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1912 (another OpenSSL exception

Re: Upcoming Fedora Legal hackfest - converting to SPDX IDs

Time corrections from the original announcement: 14:00 - 18:00 UTC 10:00 - 14:00 EDT 16:00 - 20:00 CEST On 4/17/23 10:51 AM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi SPDX-legal, As you all are well aware, Fedora has adopted the use of SPDX ids in its package metadata. So far, Fedora package maintainers have

Upcoming Fedora Legal hackfest - converting to SPDX IDs

Hi SPDX-legal, As you all are well aware, Fedora has adopted the use of SPDX ids in its package metadata. So far, Fedora package maintainers have been updating the license info for their packages at their own pace. To speed things up a bit and offer some help on potential challenges,

meeting at top of hour

Hi all, We have our regular SPDX-legal meeting at the top of the hour at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting Given we have a release due at the end of April, let's focus on decisions for pending license requests and assigning PRs for those accepted.

licenses to review

Hi SPDX-legal, Here are a few issues for licenses that could use another reviewer or two - please have a look so we can log decisions on these! Widget - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1860 Bellcore - https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1863 Latex2e translation

Re: GSOC 2023

For a bit of background for the rest of SPDX-legal: As you know we have project submitted for GSoC, and proposals are due next week! Banula has created a proposal and is looking for some feedback, which I suggested be done to the greater SPDX-legal community on ideas. Banula - perhaps you

spdx-legal meeting today

Hi all, We have a meeting at noon eastern time today. Let’s have a look at: - Steve’s PR as per his previous email, see https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/1883 codifying the exceptions criteria as discussed a couple meeting ago (this is simply capturing what we’ve been doing, as

call today at top of the hour

Hi all, We have our usual call at the top of the hour. Now that the big 3.20 release is out, we'll reset on some process-related stuff, look at some of the issues that didn't get addressed, and plan for the next round! Jilayne -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to

working session in 40', updates related to new license process and 3.20 release

Hi all, I have now updated the process documentation at https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/request-new-license.md with links to the videos Steve and I made in December. We will hopefully

call today

Hi all, We have our call today, here are a few other agenda items and some issues that need some eyeballs (and then maybe we don't need to discuss) and 1) GSoC proposal for updates to license submission (and file creation) tool 2) update on spec 3.0 and licensing profile? 3) closing out 3.20

Re: SPDX in GSoC 2023!

Thank Rohit! That would be awesome! On 2/9/23 1:44 AM, Rohit Lodha wrote: Hey Jilayne, I would be happy to co-mentor this project on spdx-online-tools. Apart from this idea, we can include many other open issues especially around testing improvements which can be taken up as part of the

Re: SPDX in GSoC 2023!

Hi SPDX-legal, I have added a potential project for GSoC related to improvements to the SPDX License Submission tool, especially as relates to generating the files once a license is accepted. You can see it here: https://github.com/spdx/GSoC/blob/main/2023_ideas.md (plus a PR I have to add

regular meeting at top of the hour!

Sorry for the short notice reminder. Given the end of the month and next release time frame is rapidly approaching, we’ll focus today’s meeting on divvying up work to get licenses added. I also want to touch base on documentation update from our last call in December. Thanks! Jilayne

Re: SPDX should take a stronger stance against vanity/promotional licenses

Hi Kyle, You raise some specific points that highlight some things we have worked on recently, so responding here inline. Jilayne On 1/24/23 4:13 PM, Kyle Mitchell wrote: If distros are seeing packaged-but-not-identified licenses in numbers to the point of pain, I'd suggest addressing that

Re: SPDX should take a stronger stance against vanity/promotional licenses

Thanks for this write-up, Richard. Having spent an exorbitant amount of my time over the years of my involvement in SPDX trying to politely say "no" to licenses for the reasons you describe below, I cannot begin to express how much I would welcome a way to make that easier and quicker.

joint legal and tech call Thursday, Jan 12th - Change Proposal: ExceptionRef

Hi all, This is a reminder that Thursday, Jan 12th at the regular legal-team call time, we will have a joint call for the tech and legal teams to discuss the change proposal: https://github.com/spdx/change-proposal/issues/4 Please see

SPDX-legal meeting - reviewing and making PRs for licenses

Hi all, As discussed on our last call, we'll have our regularly scheduled meeting Thurs, Dec 22 at noon Eastern US time. We'll use the time to go through the review of a license and how to make a PR for the necessary files. We also have a few "to discuss" items. Thanks! Jilayne

Re: Mismatches between OSI and SPDX

Awesome, Gary! Thanks for the update. Looks like some of the items listed in the issue you link to are on Max's list, so that's good. Jilayne On 12/9/22 12:12 PM, Gary O'Neall wrote: One more input on this discussion - I've been collaborating with OSI on a more automated way of keeping the

Re: Mismatches between OSI and SPDX

Hi again Max, and thanks Richard for filling in on some of this. Max - While you are not the first person who has asked about some of these, you might be the first person to have done such a thorough review! When SPDX decided that every license ever approved by the OSI should be included on

Change proposal, 2023 meeting schedule, etc.

Hi SPDX legal and tech teams, I’m cross-posting this for wider visibility as some of this impacts both teams: In regard to legal team meetings for the rest of 2022: we will have our regularly scheduled meeting on Dec 22nd and use that time as a working session to help go through the process

Re: Mismatches between OSI and SPDX

Max, All of what you have done here was already done years ago (~2011, mostly by me, working with various OSI members at that time) in terms of "matching" up the OSI list and is documented on the SPDX-legal mailing lists archives. I wish you had asked first before expending this effort! I

meeting tomorrow/Thursday

Hi all, Just a reminder of our regular legal team meeting at 9am Pacific time. We'll look at some of the open issues and discuss how to best tackle the many new license submissions we have! See:

Re: standardizing opt-out of EU data mining rights?

On 11/15/22 12:34 PM, Luis Villa wrote: Thanks for the links, Richard. I'll try to follow up there though of course welcome further discussion here as well. On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 5:06 PM Richard Fontana wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 3:01 PM Luis Villa wrote: [...] >

Re: standardizing opt-out of EU data mining rights?

Hi Luis, While I'm barely getting my head around the many complications related to the reality of AI models and data, let alone the related licensing issues... Let me try to answer some of your questions below as to the SPDX License List and process :) Cheers, Jilayne On 11/10/22 12:58

Re: licenses to review for submission

(analysis done for this one and is similar to #1551, so view together) https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/1551 Thanks! Jilayne On 11/15/22 3:51 PM, J Lovejoy wrote: Hi all, In light of our discussion on our last call about how to make it easier and faster to get licenses reviewed

licenses to review for submission

Hi all, In light of our discussion on our last call about how to make it easier and faster to get licenses reviewed (and adhere to our 3 “votes” from spdx-legal members for a license to be included), I’m sending a list of license submission issues that have at least one person reviewed below -

meeting on Thursday

Hi all, We have our regular meeting Thursday at noon Eastern time. The US set back the clocks this past weekend, so we should be back to the usual time intervals. As we move into the next release cycle, we have 32 new license requests earmarked for 3.20 - see

FAQs update

Hi all, I deviated slightly from the plan as discussed at our last call regarding updating the FAQs. I went ahead and made a PR here: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/1692 as working in the Google doc was getting a bit unwieldy. Steve - can you merge that so people can then

call at top of the hour

Hi folks, We have a regular SPDX-legal call at the top of the hour (noon, Eastern time) at https://meet.jit.si/SPDXLegalMeeting We'll have a look at whatever needs attention to close out our "documentation release" - some items that we need to address include: - updates to the SPDX License

Re: Introduction + question about CC0/confidentiality in SPDX 2.2

Hi Anna, Welcome! You have interpreted the CC0-1.0 designation and comment regarding confidentiality correctly. (Note, it is now section 6.2 in version 2.3 of the spec: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/document-creation-information/ ) There was much discussion on this in the very,

Change Proposal: ExceptionRef-

Please see our first Change Proposal submission from Alexios here: https://github.com/spdx/change-proposal/blob/main/proposals/ExceptionRef.md This is a cross-team issue for tech and legal teams. Please indicate your

FAQs updates

Hi All, As per our discussion about collaboratively updating the License List FAQ, I created this Google doc, so multiple people can make changes/additions at the same time and review before we move this to a PR in Github. Please try to use/retain the markup formatting :)

meeting tomorrow (Thursday)

Hi all, We have our regularly scheduled meeting tomorrow at 10 am mountain time (aka 9am Pacific time / noon eastern time). As we draw close to the end of this release cycle, let’s take an honest look at what we will accomplish for the documentation goals. Please review:

Re: for discussion: license inclusion guidelines

Thanks Richard, that’s helpful to point out! That and Steve’s point re: Debian Main makes me think we’d need to be somewhat specific for each distro that would trigger a lighter-weight review. More to ponder…. And Steve - agreed re: Change Proposal, I’ll add that to my list of things to do

Re: AI licenses

Hi David, Off top of head, I’m not sure if any AI-specific license have been submitted in the past but one of the RAIL licenses has just been submitted recently. It had not been reviewed yet but any license with various restrictions on fields of use would not have been accepted under the old

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >