Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:45 AM, Wheeler, David A wrote: > Philippe Ombredanne wrote: [...] >> You say: >> GPL-2.0 ==> implies GPL 2.0 only >> GPL-2.0+ ==> implies GPL 2.0 or later > That's not just what I say. That's what the spec says, and has > clearly stated since circa

RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

Schuberth, Sebastian wrote: > Using a + is a whart. Licenses that allow the use of other versions do so > explicitly in their texts, the GPL being the most prominent but the EPL comes > to mind too. So there is no such thing as GPL-2.0 or another version: these

RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

Hi Philippe, > -Original Message- > From: spdx-legal-boun...@lists.spdx.org [mailto:spdx-legal- > boun...@lists.spdx.org] On Behalf Of Philippe Ombredanne > Sent: Monday, November 2, 2015 1:57 AM > To: Schuberth, Sebastian; spdx-t...@lists.spdx.org; SPDX-legal > Subject: Re: Is "+" a

Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Schuberth, Sebastian wrote: >>> when debugging an issue in the spdx-tools verifier, I noticed the >>> SPDX 2.0 specs seem to be inconsistent on whether "+" is a >>> valid character in a LicenseRef's idstring, like in LicenseRef-[idstring]. > I wrote: >> I not

RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

I said: > In particular, "GPL-2.0" is a license identifier, and "GPL-2.0+" is *NOT*. Just a few nitpicks on my previous email: * I realize that "GPL-2.0+" is in the list of "deprecated" license identifiers, so in some sense there is a "GPL-2.0+" license identifier. But I think it's clear what

Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Schuberth, Sebastian wrote: > when debugging an issue in the spdx-tools verifier, I noticed the SPDX 2.0 > specs seem to be inconsistent on whether "+" is a valid character in a > LicenseRef's idstring, like in

Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Wheeler, David A wrote: > Philippe Ombredanne: >> This + is a suffix and not a freestanding character, right? >> Then again we would be better off to get rid of the plus entirely! > You may be confusing a SPDX "license identifier" and a SPDX

Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring?

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Gary O'Neall wrote: >> This + is a suffix and not a freestanding character, right? >> So "GPL-2.0+" is valid but "GPL-2.0+" would not be valid? > My interpretation of the spec "GPL-2.0+" and "GPL-2.0+" are both > syntactically >