[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: openembedded-core
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v3 0/4] license: Sync with SPDX 2.0, pull request
From: "Meier, Roger" <r.meier () siemens ! com>
Date: 2016-07-29 10:57:55
Message-ID: FB46AF37-B905-4CC6-9594-B768A258470D () siemens ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Now including the list as I'm subscriber now...
Am 29.07.2016 um 11:14 schrieb Meier, Roger (BT CPS R&D ZG FW CCP) <r.meier=
@siemens.com<mailto:r.meier@siemens.com>>:
Hi Mark
Am 26.07.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com<mailto:=
mark.hatle@windriver.com>>:
On 7/26/16 9:12 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 16:19 +0300, Sergei Miroshnichenko wrote:
Here are the request for a community review for a synchronization
with the SPDX License List (git.spdx.org/license-list.git<http://git.spdx.o=
rg/license-list.git>) and adding
license operators to meet SPDX 2.0 specification compliance
(https://spdx.org/sites/spdx/files/SPDX-2.0.pdf Appendix IV: SPDX
License Expression).
The whole patch series is way too big to send them to the mailing
list (the biggest one is ~3MiB), so please find the diffs via gitweb
of the -contrib repo.
Whilst we certainly want to collaborate with SPDX, we've never said our
LICENSE field should match what SPDX is doing. Your patch appears to
unequivocally join them as a 1:1 mapping and I'm not sure this is
something we've ever planned or agreed to. These fields do get written
into the packages and used in a variety of places.
Certainly if we are going to map them 1:1, this is something which
would need discussion on the OE architecture list first. I'd be nervous
about committing to do that, not knowing or having any influence over
what SPDX may do next.
SPDX is part of linux foundation and they listen to the open source communi=
ties,
Jilayne Lovejoy is maintaining the license list and she is very open minded=
if we have further questions or have better ideas on the direction of the =
spdx license list itself, e.g. for simpler integration into other systems s=
uch as OE.
Is the intent here to map us 1:1 with SPDX and are you advocating that?
I agree. This needs to be set as part of the OE Architecture first. I don=
't
object to the format or contents of the change -- just that it's a pretty b=
ig
change for how things work.
I was not aware of a seperate architecture list, sorry.
The goal here is to reduce efforts on license compliance by using the well =
known SPDX license list.
There are two approaches
* having a SPDX license list beside of the OE license list
* reuse the SPDX license list as suggested via this patch series
Also looking over the patches, the changes to the license text (common-lice=
nses)
need some more explanation. The comment says it syncs to the spdx license =
list.
But mostly what I see are simply format changes that actually make it harde=
r
for developers to read the license text.
Is there any reference/explanation as to why the formatting changes are
required/suggested/etc?
The licenses are directly from the spdx license list and having them in syn=
c with the spdx license list makes it much easier to maintain in the future=
. Just synch with latest license list as soon as a new version is published=
.
Some licenses do already have some place holders for copyright holders, whi=
ch is part of the license matching rules, that's why you see some special f=
ields, see http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines
Best!
Roger
--Mark
Cheers,
Richard
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
<div></div>
<div>Now including the list as I'm subscriber now...</div>
<div><br>
Am 29.07.2016 um 11:14 schrieb Meier, Roger (BT CPS R&D ZG FW CCP) <<a \
href="mailto:r.meier@siemens.com">r.meier@siemens.com</a>>:<br> <br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><span></span></div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div>Hi Mark</div>
<div><br>
Am 26.07.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Mark Hatle <<a \
href="mailto:mark.hatle@windriver.com">mark.hatle@windriver.com</a>>:<br> <br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>On 7/26/16 9:12 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:</span><br>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 16:19 +0300, Sergei \
Miroshnichenko wrote:</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Here are the request for a community review for a \
synchronization</span><br> </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>with the SPDX License List (<a \
href="http://git.spdx.org/license-list.git">git.spdx.org/license-list.git</a>) and \
adding</span><br> </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>license operators to meet SPDX 2.0 specification \
compliance</span><br> </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>(<a \
href="https://spdx.org/sites/spdx/files/SPDX-2.0.pdf">https://spdx.org/sites/spdx/files/SPDX-2.0.pdf</a> \
Appendix IV: SPDX</span><br> </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>License Expression).</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>The whole patch series is way too big to send them to \
the mailing </span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>list (the biggest one is ~3MiB), so please find the \
diffs via gitweb </span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><span>of the -contrib repo.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Whilst we certainly want to collaborate with SPDX, \
we've never said our</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>LICENSE field should match what SPDX is doing. Your \
patch appears to</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>unequivocally join them as a 1:1 mapping and I'm not \
sure this is</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>something we've ever planned or agreed to. These fields \
do get written</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>into the packages and used in a variety of \
places.</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Certainly if we are going to map them 1:1, this is \
something which</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>would need discussion on the OE architecture list \
first. I'd be nervous</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>about committing to do that, not knowing or having any \
influence over</span><br> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>what SPDX may do next. </span><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
SPDX is part of linux foundation and they listen to the open source communities,
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Jilayne Lovejoy is \
maintaining the license list and she is very open minded if we have further questions \
or have better ideas on the direction of the spdx license list itself, e.g. for \
simpler integration into other systems such as OE.</span><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Is the intent here to map us 1:1 with SPDX and are you \
advocating that?</span><br> </blockquote>
<span></span><br>
<span>I agree. This needs to be set as part of the OE Architecture first. \
I don't</span><br> <span>object to the format or contents of the change -- just \
that it's a pretty big</span><br> <span>change for how things work.</span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
I was not aware of a seperate architecture list, sorry.
<div>The goal here is to reduce efforts on license compliance by using the well known \
SPDX license list.</div> <div><br>
<div>There are two approaches</div>
<div>* having a SPDX license list beside of the OE license list</div>
<div>* reuse the SPDX license list as suggested via this patch series</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span></span><br>
<span>Also looking over the patches, the changes to the license text \
(common-licenses)</span><br> <span>need some more explanation. The comment says \
it syncs to the spdx license list.</span><br> <span>But mostly what I see are simply \
format changes that actually make it harder</span><br> <span>for developers to read \
the license text.</span></div> </blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>Is there any reference/explanation as to why the formatting changes \
are</span><br> <span>required/suggested/etc?</span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">The licenses are directly \
from the spdx license list and having them in sync with the spdx license list makes \
it much easier to maintain in the future. Just synch with latest license list as soon \
as a new version is published.</span>
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Some licenses do already \
have some place holders for copyright holders, which is part of the license matching \
rules, that's why you see some special fields, see </span><a \
href="http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines">http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/matching-guidelines</a></div>
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Best!</span></div>
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Roger</span></div>
<div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br>
</span></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span></span><br>
<span>--Mark</span></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span></span><br>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Cheers,</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span>Richard</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<span></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
--===============0961262861==--
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic