Hi, > > This data is important and needs to be represented somehow, because > BUSL is still the "real" license, even after the automatic conversion.
I actually don't see the importance of this information. For a pragmatic compliance use-case the only interesting information are the currently applicable licensing terms - which are the licensing terms of GPL after the conversion. BUSL isn't the "real" license anymore after the conversion. The whole point of the conversion is to make the software available under different terms, which makes the original terms obsolete. For a package consumer, at time of install/usage there is no need to know the original license. If you believe this information is important to some specific consumers, you could just add a SPDX document and set the declared license to BUSL, the concluded license to GPL and add comments in the respective field. This way, you'd get this information (that probably only a very limited subset of consumers is interested in) across in a well supported way without complicating the expression syntax. If your use-case is to gather temporal information about a package, e.g. how the package licensing changes over time, this information would be useful. But this use-case implies so many more things that SPDX isn't capable of representing nicely - manual license changes, copyright changes, subtle wording changes etc. Could you elaborate your intended use-case for this and from what point-of-view this information would be useful or necessary? Best, Lukas -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1888): https://lists.spdx.org/g/spdx/message/1888 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/107317043/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/spdx/leave/2655439/21656/1698928721/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
