> We've started having some discussions with FSF about what they'd prefer, and > their preference seems to be GPL-2.0-only, so we probably want to go that > way rather than introducing the "!" idea.
Okay. Although that's less flexible, that's much easier to transition (you don't have to change any parsing code), so I see the advantages of this. If this is done: 1. It needs to cover all the licenses where this is likely. At *least* GPL and LGPL; I think MPL is probably in this case too. 2. The original license terms need to *stay* in SPDX, with modified clarifying text. Something like this: GPL-2.0: The GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2.0 is acceptable, and without any clear statement if later versions are acceptable. Where practical, try to use more specific license expressions such as "GPL-2.0+", "GPL-2.0-only", or "(GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only)". Historically this indicator meant "GPL version 2.0 only", but in practice tools often can't determine if later ones are acceptable (or not) & used this term in such cases. This specification acknowledges this practice and provides more specific alternatives when that information is available. _______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
