From: ng0 <ng0@n0.is>
To: guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: license naming
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 18:31:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171222183149.4jv23as6nrtkt52l@abyayala> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2130 bytes --]
I've just read this link: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-article-for-claritys-sake-please-dont-say-licensed-under-gnu-gpl-2
Full Quote:
> In this article, For Clarity's Sake, Please Don't Say "Licensed under GNU GPL 2"!, Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman (RMS) explains how to properly identify what GNU license your work is under. Whenever a developer releases their work under a GNU license, they have the option to either release it under that version of the license only, or to make it available under any later version of that license. This option ensures that software can remain compatible with future versions of the license. But what happens if someone just says their program is under GNU GPL version 2, for example?
>
>> [T]hey are leaving the licensing of the program unclear. Is it released under GPL-2.0-only, or GPL-2.0-or-later? Can you merge the code with packages released under GPL-3.0-or-later?
>
> Thus, it is vitally important that developers indicate in their license notices whether they are licensing their work under that version "only" or under "any later version." Of course, these days it is also helpful for license notices to be machine-readable. The Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) specification sets a standardized way of identifying licenses on software packages. They are updating their license identifiers to include this distinction in their upcoming version. For example, for GNU GPL version 2, the identifiers are now "GPL-2.0-only or GPL-2.0-or-later." The old identifiers (e.g. "GPL-2.0") are now deprecated and should no longer be used. Based on the changes SPDX says are coming in the SPDX specification and its Web site, the FSF expects to endorse the new version of the SPDX. We thank SPDX and their community for making these helpful changes.
Maybe we could make use of what https://spdx.org/licenses/
provides. I didn't compare the names with our names, I'll do
this on the train next week.
Good idea, bad idea?
--
GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588
GnuPG: https://c.n0.is/ng0_pubkeys/tree/keys
WWW: https://n0.is
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2017-12-22 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-22 18:31 ng0 [this message]
2017-12-22 18:43 ` license naming Jelle Licht
2017-12-22 18:51 ` ng0
2017-12-22 21:16 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171222183149.4jv23as6nrtkt52l@abyayala \
--to=ng0@n0.is \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).