great, thanks Wayne! Jilayne SPDX Legal Team co-lead [email protected]
> On Dec 21, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Wayne Beaton > <[email protected]> wrote: > > My apologies. I just found the earlier response in my email backlog. > > Thanks for taking the time to (re)respond. > > We can live with this. > > Thanks, > > Wayne > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:55 AM, J Lovejoy <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > I thought we had addressed this, but Philippe is correct: > As per our Matching Guidelines - > https://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines > <https://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines> - this would match > to BSD-3-Clause. If you look at the HTML page for BSD-3-Clause, you can see a > visual representation of the text that is allowed to be “replaceable” as per > matching guideline 2.1.3 in red text: > https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html > <https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html> > > Where a license is a match according to our guidelines, we don’t add the > license, as that would be repetitive and we encourage people to use the > identifier for the existing license already on the list. A key goal of the > SPDX License List is to create consistent ways to identify licenses - having > two identifiers for the same license text does not really reach that goal. > > In this case, I’d have to also ask - why wouldn’t you want to use the common > and well known name for a very common and well known license, instead of a > “vanity name”? > > Thanks, > Jilayne > > > SPDX Legal Team co-lead > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > >> On Dec 21, 2017, at 1:40 AM, Philippe Ombredanne <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Wayne, Simon, >> >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Wayne Beaton >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> How can I help make this happen? >>> >>> Wayne >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Simon Bernard <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would like to now if this could make sense to add the "EDL - Eclipse >>>> Distribution License" to spdx ? >>>> I ask the question because it seems this is a >>>> https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause >>>> <https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause>. >>>> See : https://eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php >>>> <https://eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php> >>>> But many eclipse projects use it and this could help to identify it >>>> quickly with tools like spdx. >> >> The problem with the EDL is that its text is strictly the BSD-3-Clause. >> >> The only differences would be: >> 1. an extra name that may not be present >> 2. possibly an Eclipse copyright holder >> >> IMHO these two are not sufficient to warrant a new license in SPDX. >> >> On the detection side, I used to have EDL as a "named" license in >> Scancode, but I removed it [1] a while back to use it as a plain >> detection rule instead: this was creating too many detection >> ambiguities as both the EDL and BSD would be detected exactly, because >> they are one and the same text-wise. >> >> So some questions: >> 1. Why would be using BSD-3-Clause a problem to you? >> 2. How can you distinguish at all times a BSD-3-Clause from and EDL? >> >> I would be happy to bring back a specialized detection in ScanCode if >> you can provide me with some non-ambiguous rules in which case you >> would have a license ref but not an official SPDX id. This may be good >> enough? >> >> [1] >> https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit/commit/685a8b38b1f156793307a737e003ee5726a81c62 >> >> <https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit/commit/685a8b38b1f156793307a737e003ee5726a81c62> >> -- >> Cordially >> Philippe Ombredanne >> >> +1 650 799 0949 <tel:(650)%20799-0949> | [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> DejaCode - What's in your code?! - http://www.dejacode.com >> <http://www.dejacode.com/> >> AboutCode - Open source for open source - https://www.aboutcode.org >> <https://www.aboutcode.org/> >> nexB Inc. - http://www.nexb.com <http://www.nexb.com/> >> _______________________________________________ >> Spdx-legal mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal >> <https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal> > > > > > -- > Wayne Beaton > Director of Open Source Projects > The Eclipse Foundation
_______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
