I feel like what some projects might find useful is something like: SPDX-License-Identifier-Concluding-What's-Been-Contributed-As-Of-Some-Past-Time: SPDX-License-Identifier-Of-What's-Been-Contributed-After-That-Past-Time-And-Default-License-of-Future-Contributions:
since these might point to different licenses. The snippet construct can possibly express this adequately in some cases but I think reliable identification of a snippet will normally be impractical. Richard On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 3:18 PM McCoy Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > At the risk of sounding like I’m hijacking this to re-raise my prior issue: > If AND is the operator to be used when having different inbound vs outbound, > then AND may not be commutative, since the order of listing the licenses may > convey information about which license is inbound vs outbound, and (maybe) > which license applies to different parts of the code. > Which militates to me toward a new expression, but I’ve made that point > already. > > > On Jul 17, 2022, at 11:22 AM, Richard Fontana <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'm working on some draft documentation for Fedora around use of SPDX > > expressions in RPM spec file License: fields. I was surprised to > > apparently not see anything in the SPDX spec that says that the AND > > and OR operators are commutative. I want to assert that the expression > > "MIT AND Apache-2.0" is equivalent to "Apache-2.0 AND MIT". Does the > > SPDX spec actually take no position on this? > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > >b -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3187): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3187 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/92443713/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
