SPDX Legal and Tech teams: At the Collab Summit working session, we made good progress on talking through how to best provide guidance in regards to matching licenses to the SPDX License List. The notes from that meeting have been posted here: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2013-04-16 and the current License Matching Guidelines are located here: http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines
Notably, it was decided that some kind of mark-up was needed in the license files to provide precise guidance, beyond descriptive guidelines, in regards to text within a license that can be either ignored or is replaceable. Currently, the SPDX License List includes a .txt file for each license on the list; using mark-up that could be simply included in those .txt files, as opposed to having a separate "template" file is highly preferred. The meeting ended with discussion around using the mustache template system and shortly after the meeting, Daniel submitted a proposal for using regular expressions, along with a few examples (see link below in this email). There was some discussion on the first legal and tech calls after Collab Summit, but in order for consensus to be reached, we need both teams involved in this final decision before we can implement. Thus, we will have a joint Tech and Legal Team call during the legal call, this Thursday, May 23 at 10amPT / 11am MT / 1pm ET Dial-in: 866.740.1260 Access code: 2404545 Key issues to discuss: 1) Can we use Daniel's regular expression proposal? Will this still allow for freedom to innovate for various existing (and potential) future tool-makers? Is there any way to avoid having two files for each license? What if there are licenses that don't need a template, would they still need a "pair"? 2) If we go this route, how will we get this work done (I.e. Creating the templates for the current SPDX License List of 210 licenses)? The regular expression format is too complicated for the legal team to implement, which means we will need to recruit help from the Tech team or elsewhere (is there an elsewhere option?); or simplify the regular expressions used. The legal team will need to be involved in terms of decisions around what is appropriate to be replaced or omitted, so consideration to process and planning need also be taken into account. Thanks and hope you can join, Jilayne Lovejoy SPDX Legal Team | Co-lead OpenLogic, Inc. | Corporate Counsel [email protected]<applewebdata://EAA1F861-B11E-4827-976F-55756901A796/[email protected]> From: Gary O'Neall <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 5:16 PM To: J Lovejoy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "Manbeck, Jack" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Philip Odence <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: License Matching Guidelines - cont'd discussion w/Tech and Legal teams Hi Jilayne, Overall, looks good. A couple minor typo corrections below (future took-makers -> future tool makers; end parent on bullet #2). I'm also wondering if we can restrict the regular expression language to make it easy enough for the legal team to implement. If you agree, we can change #2: 2) If we go this route, how will we get this work done (I.e. Creating the templates for the current SPDX License List of 210 licenses)? The regular expression format is too complicated for the legal team to implement, which means we will either need to recruit help from the Tech team or elsewhere (is there an elsewhere option?) or simplify the regular expressions used; The legal team will need to be involved in terms of decisions around what is appropriate to be replaced or omitted, so consideration to process and planning need also be taken into account. I would be happy to help facilitate the discussions. I'm hoping I get some time tomorrow to writeup a process proposal to go along with Daniel's format proposal that solves the single copy of a license text problem. Gary From: Gary O'Neall <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, April 19, 2013 9:26 PM To: "Daniel M. German" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, SPDX-legal <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: proposal for license templates Thanks Daniel for writing up the proposal. Overall, the proposal looks good to me. A few extensions and clarification I would propose adding: - There are 2 Posix regular expression flavors - would propose POSIX ERE since I believe most programmatic use of Posix Regex uses this flavor and it supports alternation - Disallow the use of Posix Bracket Extensions since it is not fully supported by most regex engines (e.g. PERL, PHP, Java, ECMA) - All 4 fields are required in all cases - We should specify the case of the keywords or whether they are case insensitive - I would propose the 4 keywords must be lowercase without any leading or trailing spaces Gary From:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of dmg Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:14 PM To: SPDX-legal; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: proposal for license templates After the discussion on templatization lead by Jilayne and after discussions with Gary. Here is my proposal for templatizing the BSD3 and BSD4: https://github.com/dmgerman/spdxTemplates So far I have created templates for BSD3 and BSD4. It is very simple and it is described in the file README.org -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org
_______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
_______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
