On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:20 AM, J Lovejoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> During the SPDX bake-off it came up that NTP
> https://spdx.org/licenses/NTP.html can match to HPND
> https://spdx.org/licenses/HPND.html due to the template nature of HPND.  The
> folks in the bakeoff wanted to know if we ought to deprecate one of these
> licenses in favor of using the other or how a tool should reconcile which
> license to “pick” where both could be a valid answer.  Talking about this
> here in Berlin and looking at the licenses, can we please discuss the
> following items on the next legal call:
>
> 1) Both of these licenses are OSI-approved, which is why they are both on
> the SPDX License List. Given that we endeavor to have all OSI-approved
> licenses on the SPDX License List (even if they are old or have been
> voluntarily deprecated by the author, as has HPND), so I don’t view
> deprecation as an option.  All agree?
>
> 2) As to HPND, we did not have markup for this license, but it needs it -
> Sam has added markup to the XML template and Brad has reviewed. It is
> flagged for review by the legal team:
> https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/89/files  - can we get another
> set of eyes on this, both from the legal perspective and to check the
> markup?
>
> 3) OSI has comments as to how to “match” this license at the bottom of their
> page - https://opensource.org/licenses/HPNDl - should we add this to the
> Notes field, as is suggested in the XML file (do we really need it,
> especially if we have the markup and since the line about white space and
> capitalization merely repeats a couple of our matching guidelines?)
>
> 4) I would recommend adding a comment in the Notes field for each license
> along the lines of the following:
> - for NTP: "This license is the same as HPND, when taking into consideration
> the templatizing options given in that license.  This is included as a
> separate license on the SPDX License List because it is separately approved
> by the OSI.”
>
> - HPND: “Due to the templatization options of this license, it can be the
> same text as NTP license. This is included as a separate license on the SPDX
> License List because it is separately approved by the OSI.”
>
> Please edit as needed.  Perhaps we can then ask the OSI to add similar
> language on their pages as well, so it is all consistent.

This all make sense. The only point is that the licenses are not the
same, but are similar: the HPND has an additional warranty disclaimer.
So I am not sure why this would ever be an issue matching-wise and
this may not warrant a note in the license.
-- 
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne
_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech

Reply via email to