spdx-tech  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: Git repository for JSON license files Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Git repository for JSON license files Gary O'Neall
• RE: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile Nuno Brito
• For review - SPDX 2.1 Model Gary O'Neall
  • Re: For review - SPDX 2.1 Model Jeremiah Foster
• SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Bill Schineller
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Kate Stewart
  • RE: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Bill Schineller
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Wheeler, David A
  • Re: SPDX: Many tags should NOT be mandatory for the "developer assertion" use case Yev Bronshteyn
• [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1349] Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf bugzilla-daemon
  • Re: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Gary O'Neall
  • Re: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Gary O'Neall
  • Re: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Yev Bronshteyn
  • RE: [Bug 1349] New: Change RDF Ontology Relationship_datafile to Relationship_datafileOf Gary O'Neall
• [Bug 1348] New: Update the example SPDX documents that ship with the tool bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1348] Update the example SPDX documents that ship with the tool bugzilla-daemon
• SPDX 2.1 candidate walkthrough: 9-12 in Monument Peak room at Collab. Kate Stewart
• Draft of Appendix for Using SPDX short license identifiers in Source Files. Kate Stewart
• SPDX Tech concall TODAY CANCELED Bill Schineller
• Updated templates Kris . re
  • RE: Updated templates Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Updated templates Kris . re
  • Re: Updated templates J Lovejoy
• SPDX Expressions on npmjs.com Kyle E. Mitchell
  • RE: SPDX Expressions on npmjs.com Gary O'Neall
• Beta version of JSON license formats available on spdx.org/licenses Gary O'Neall
• Request for project ides for 2016 Google Summer of Code Gary O'Neall
• Reminder: joint call on matching/markup in 2 hours time. kate.stewart
• XML source files Kris . re
• [Bug 1341] New: Clarify which licenses follow Open Source Definition (OSI Approved), and not refer to all the licenses in the license list as open source licenses. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1341] Clarify which licenses follow Open Source Definition (OSI Approved), and not refer to all the licenses in the license list as open source licenses. bugzilla-daemon
• Re: Update on matching markup/joint call J Lovejoy
• Update Kris . re
  • Re: Update Bill Schineller
  • Re: Update Kate Stewart
  • Re: Update J Lovejoy
  • RE: Update gary
  • Re: Update Kris Reeves
  • Re: Update Kris Reeves
• Joint tech & legal call: License templates - today Kate Stewart
  • Re: Joint tech & legal call: License templates - today J Lovejoy
• Machine representation of deprecated licenses Gary O'Neall
  • Re: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Henri Yandell
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Manbeck, Jack
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Manbeck, Jack
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Gary O'Neall
  • Re: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Josiah Krutz
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Machine representation of deprecated licenses Gary O'Neall
• Relationships and Dependencies Matt Germonprez
  • RE: Relationships and Dependencies Manbeck, Jack
  • RE: Relationships and Dependencies Manbeck, Jack
  • Re: Relationships and Dependencies Matt Germonprez
  • RE: Relationships and Dependencies Gisi, Mark
  • Re: Relationships and Dependencies Matt Germonprez
• [Bug 980] Signed SPDX dataset bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 632] tag-value format should be register as a mime media type bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 632] tag-value format should be register as a mime media type bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 1248] Enhancement: Add ArtifactOf to Packages bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1248] Enhancement: Add ArtifactOf to Packages bugzilla-daemon
• Spdx-tools RdfToHtml Janusz Kwasny
  • RE: Spdx-tools RdfToHtml Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Spdx-tools RdfToHtml Gary O'Neall
• Using markdown for the SPDX Specs Manbeck, Jack
  • Re: Using markdown for the SPDX Specs Kate Stewart
  • Re: Using markdown for the SPDX Specs Philippe Ombredanne
  • RE: Using markdown for the SPDX Specs Zavras, Alexios
• [Bug 1335] New: We use an obsolete URI spec for definition of Document Namespace and do so incorrectly bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1335] We use an obsolete URI spec for definition of Document Namespace and do so incorrectly bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1335] We use an obsolete URI spec for definition of Document Namespace and do so incorrectly bugzilla-daemon
• Proposed changes for external document references in Snippet proposal Gary O'Neall
• SPDX 2.1 Best Practices Google Doc Yev Bronshteyn
  • Re: SPDX 2.1 Best Practices Google Doc Yev Bronshteyn
• Minutes from 12/8 call posted kate.stewart
• [Bug 1334] New: Simplify grammar in Appendix IV? bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1334] Simplify grammar in Appendix IV? bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 1333] New: SPDX SPEC fails to discuss whitespace bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1333] SPDX SPEC fails to discuss whitespace bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 1332] New: ABNF bug? bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1332] ABNF bug? bugzilla-daemon
• Bug and issues in SPDX grammar (Appendix IV)? Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Bug and issues in SPDX grammar (Appendix IV)? Wheeler, David A
• [Bug 1330] New: consider SPDX-License-Expression as an alternate for SPDX-License-Identifier for use source files bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1330] consider SPDX-License-Expression as an alternate for SPDX-License-Identifier for use source files bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 1329] New: Clarify in specification the file suffices to use for SPDX tag:value and RDF/XML files. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1329] Clarify in specification the file suffices to use for SPDX tag:value and RDF/XML files. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1329] Clarify in specification the file suffices to use for SPDX tag:value and RDF/XML files. bugzilla-daemon
• [Bug 1328] New: Link to download sped-tools results in page not found error. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1328] Link to download spdx-tools results in page not found error. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1328] Link to download spdx-tools results in page not found error. bugzilla-daemon
• Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Sam Ellis
  • RE: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Kate Stewart
  • Re: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Kate Stewart
  • RE: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Kate Stewart
  • RE: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Proposed *SHORT* SPDX tutorial Wheeler, David A
• Canceling spdx-tech meeting on 11/24 and 12/1 Kate Stewart
• Re: Machine-readable form of license list? J Lovejoy
  • Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Philippe Ombredanne
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • AW: Prototype spdxify codewalker Fendt, Oliver
  • RE: Prototype spdxify codewalker Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • RE: Prototype spdxify codewalker Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • RE: Prototype spdxify codewalker Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Prototype spdxify codewalker Branden Robinson (brarobin)
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker J Lovejoy
  • AW: Prototype spdxify codewalker Fendt, Oliver
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Kevin P. Fleming
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • AW: Prototype spdxify codewalker Fendt, Oliver
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Kevin P. Fleming
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker J Lovejoy
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker Eric S. Raymond
  • Re: Prototype spdxify codewalker J Lovejoy
  • RE: Machine-readable form of license list? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • Re: Machine-readable form of license list? Eric S. Raymond
  • Re: Machine-readable form of license list? Philippe Ombredanne
  • Re: Machine-readable form of license list? Eric S. Raymond
  • RE: Machine-readable form of license list? Gary O'Neall
• Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Kate Stewart
  • RE: Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Proposal: "SPDX-LICENSE" file convention Nuno Brito
• [Bug 1327] New: Clarify case sensitivity of Short Form licenses - for list and tools. bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1327] Clarify case sensitivity of Short Form licenses - for list and tools. bugzilla-daemon
• Re: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? (Ben Balter) J Lovejoy
  • Re: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? (Ben Balter) Kate Stewart
  • RE: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? (Ben Balter) Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? (Ben Balter) Gary O'Neall
• draft proposals status for SPDX 2.1 Bill Schineller
• Extracted text for dual license Orestis Ioannou
  • RE: Extracted text for dual license Zavras, Alexios
  • RE: Extracted text for dual license Sam Ellis
  • Re: Extracted text for dual license Orestis Ioannou
• Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Gary O'Neall
  • Re: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Ben Balter
  • RE: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Zavras, Alexios
  • Re: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Ben Balter
  • Re: Are SPDX license identifiers case-sensitive? Philippe Ombredanne
• material for tech call later today Kate Stewart
• Running a couple mintes late / link to Snippets proposal Gary O'Neall
• [Bug 1326] New: Inconsistency whether "+" is a valid character in LicenseRef ID strings bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1326] Inconsistency whether "+" is a valid character in LicenseRef ID strings bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1326] Inconsistency whether "+" is a valid character in LicenseRef ID strings bugzilla-daemon
  • [Bug 1326] Inconsistency whether "+" is a valid character in LicenseRef ID strings bugzilla-daemon
• joint legal-tech call Thursday!! [email protected]
  • Re: joint legal-tech call Thursday!! Kate Stewart
• Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Bill Schineller
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Gary O'Neall
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Kate Stewart
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Gary O'Neall
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Schuberth, Sebastian
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Kate Stewart
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Philippe Ombredanne
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Wheeler, David A
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Philippe Ombredanne
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Tom Incorvia
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Philippe Ombredanne
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Gary O'Neall
  • Re: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Philippe Ombredanne
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Wheeler, David A
  • RE: Is "+" a valid character of a LicenseRef idstring? Wheeler, David A

• Earlier messages
• Later messages