From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: license naming Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 18:51:06 +0000 Message-ID: <20171222185106.mquzlgq3bjybkxpu@abyayala> References: <20171222183149.4jv23as6nrtkt52l@abyayala> <87po76iowp.fsf@fsfe.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4axm6waidvydagun" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33414) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSSPq-0006lI-2C for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 13:51:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSSPn-0001sZ-0e for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 13:51:30 -0500 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:52876) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eSSPm-0001pJ-Oe for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 13:51:26 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87po76iowp.fsf@fsfe.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Jelle Licht Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --4axm6waidvydagun Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jelle Licht transcribed 2.3K bytes: >=20 > ng0 writes: >=20 > > 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) expl= ains 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 wh= at happens if someone just says their program is under GNU GPL version 2, f= or example? > >> > >>> [T]hey are leaving the licensing of the program unclear. Is it rel= eased 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 licens= e notices whether they are licensing their work under that version "only" o= r under "any later version." Of course, these days it is also helpful for l= icense notices to be machine-readable. The Software Package Data Exchange (= SPDX) specification sets a standardized way of identifying licenses on soft= ware 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 identif= iers (e.g. "GPL-2.0") are now deprecated and should no longer be used. Base= d 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 SPD= X 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? >=20 > We already have a `spdx-string->license' function in > `(guix import utils)', in case you need a starting point. It > makes sense to me to use a de facto way of referring to licenses, > but I am not sure whether this has some disadvantages compared to the > currently used way of referring to licenses. >=20 > - Jelle My "problem", or rather the question I pose is: Does it make sense to adjust how the license is displayed? Like instead of "GPL 2" We'd display "GPL 2.0 only" and instead of "GPL 2+" (no example at hand to test if this is the current display) we'd display "GPL 2 or later". --=20 GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588 GnuPG: https://c.n0.is/ng0_pubkeys/tree/keys WWW: https://n0.is --4axm6waidvydagun Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEqIyK3RKYKNfqwC5S4i+bv+40hYgFAlo9VBkACgkQ4i+bv+40 hYiIew/+M8EVK8iFlVv63Z0biY4rY9bWxu7u/p67O1OieNDDQ7PrprVu5QK9vsDU DFrGIC/VYjW7o1dgdqYVUob6vywFYBB02ZXZ1nH/yQpDtTmUQetRWBTsWedxEN/0 IdQ9vvRJXeMKW505Ib4k6JjebPLMjclLT4ECBgM+gqPzyj4/PkElxQnPAHE0ptcR o/ruZvzTNZK0wNWODSXE/I8HvurRPJ9jZV3EDo/Mi7DioJLQMrpFQvbZ5K9ahEgS 0A5ycADM5dUU3A8CShI8aItp2sND0qWJwMTgoB1QSoYqnvxAnWQZLJ0e09p9oLAb 3v7xke6ugkIBTD2gIByj4YMHQXX5ZDHhzqGFjxV6yJrP9WBV3uNWzyFNTxoYJsO9 6IfP9p3N8+QLQEiuSGQPMXmlVcT8S/tP9S5V0pCuoqvXPWRzd5j0K1A5rOAQn9V5 Z1z3hkJ0NfsxebG6OfYvbl6OQL/VCFUHJDN+In1irZmsMc2wqR9TAOUAK0TSmC3c hC6g8bk4w3JnEn2qZ1Td4SUEua5QvgjMFMKPhUYTRulY9uhwXnQZRvYMZeYMtb8E hmNFTYN+15S5UieyA9bh94TsnXUB1FS5yaSoG02aUOedlg/z3lJ6qbmb0bU8K2EH nrlRiiIh9FybeZhxqhouIz0RarQvpjHJOZj9bqThBQiyiEf3cpE= =3Ntt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4axm6waidvydagun--