POM license guidance (and need for documentation/FAQ)

[Timothy Stone]

I'm trying to improve the use of POM meta-data such as <licenses> in our internal projects.

Thanks!
Tim

[1]. https://maven.apache.org/pom.html#licenses

--
Timothy Stone
=============
Some call me ... Tim.
Husband, Father, Blogger, OSS, Wargamer, Home Brewer, and D&D
Find me on GitLab | GitHub | Linked In | MeWe | GnuPG

However, proprietary code, i.e., "unlicensed" code, is not explicitly documented in the POM Reference[1]. A search of the mailing list did not turn up any discussions in the past (though how far back that search looked may be in question). The SPDX does not recognize "UNLICENSED" (though NPM does) and NOT to be confused with "The Unlicense" (SPDX "Unlicense"). How does the community manage this? Is this a documentation PR opportunity based on feedback here? A best practice is sought. The explicit recommendation for documenting the recommended pattern in the POM would be valuable to many organizations.

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature