As per discussion on our call this morning, I promised to compare the SISSL v 1.1 (which is on the SPDX License List, short identifier: SISSL) with v1.2 that Camille found.
The substantive differences are as follows: v1.2 omits sections 9 (Limit of Liability), 10 (US End Gov't Users) and 11 (Miscellaneous) v1.2 adds the following sequence to the end of section 3.1: "Additionally, in the event that the Modifications you create do not meet the requirements set out in this Section, You agree to comply with the Standards requirements set out in Exhibit B." And then also has different text for Exhibit B For these reasons and considering our guidelines on what constitutes a different license, I would conclude this is different enough to warrant adding as a new license to the list. Unless anyone object, I will do so and use the short identifier: SISSL-1.2 As for the issue of whether to change the current short identifier from "SISSL" to "SISSL-1.1" - we will leave it as it is for now, with the recognition that we should think about a process in the event that we do need to change a short identifier some day. (more on that in the meeting minutes later) Thanks, Jilayne On 7/18/13 9:06 AM, "Jilayne Lovejoy" <[email protected]> wrote: >Thanks (again) Camille! While you are right in your assessment that >"SISSL-1.1" would be more consistent with the short identifier naming >scheme, we have also endeavoured not to change short identifiers if at all >possible, so this is another item of discussion on the legal call today >(any chance you can join?) > >Jilayne Lovejoy >SPDX Legal Team | Co-lead >OpenLogic, Inc. | Corporate Counsel > >[email protected] > > > > >On 7/11/13 4:38 AM, "Philip Odence" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>forwarding to legal list from general meeting list. >> >>On 7/11/13 6:12 AM, "Camille Moulin" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>Hi all, >>> >>>I'm comparing SPDX and Fossology's licenses IDs and encountered a little >>>difficulty regarding the Sun Industry Standards Source License. >>>The SPDX id for the version 1.1 of the license is just "SISSL", while >>>Fossology's is "SISSL-1.1". At first glance, it seems that Fossology's >>>choice is more consistent with SPDX's naming scheme, and I don't see the >>>benefits of removing the version number. It also seems that there is a >>>1.2 version of this license >>>(http://gridscheduler.sourceforge.net/Gridengine_SISSL_license.html ). >>>So, would adding the version number to the ID be desirable / possible ? >>> >>>Best, >>>Camille >>> >>>-- >>>Gouvernance Open Source - Alter Way www.alterway.fr >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Spdx mailing list >>>[email protected] >>>https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Spdx-legal mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal > >_______________________________________________ >Spdx-legal mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
