THE SPDX WIKI IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. ALL CONTENT HAS BEEN MOVED TO https://github.com/spdx

Difference between revisions of "Legal Team/Current Projects and Issues"

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
LAST UPDATED: 25 April 2013
+
<big>'''SPDX Legal Team projects for 2015'''</big>
  
−
SPDX Legal Team projects for 2013
+
We will try to not delete items, but mark them as "DONE" to serve as a record of progress over the course of the year.
  
−
== License List requests/additions tracking page ==
+
LAST UPDATED: 5 May 2015
−
owner: Jack Manbeck (goal to get this up and current by end of May)
+
−
# create wiki page with table for tracking, with relevant/appropriate columns
+
−
# propagate with recent and outstanding requests
+
−
# update going forward
+
  
−
==Review process for requesting a new license webpage==
+
== Licenses Under Review ==
−
owner: Jason Buttara (first pass by 5/3, team to review at 5/10 meeting --> '''DONE''' (team reviewed, posted on webpage)
+
* Owner: Dennis Clark
 +
* Timeframe: On-going
 +
* New license or exception requests are tracked here:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11AKxLBoN_VXM32OmDTk2hKeYExKzsnPjAVM7rLstQ8s/edit?pli=1#gid=695212681
  
−
==OSI outstanding issues==
+
== Update & Maintain SPDX License List ==
−
owner: Jilayne  
+
* Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
−
# various OSI approved (but old or deprecated) licenses don't have corresponding link on OSI site; OSI to update and then SPDX to add link to SPDX-LL
+
* Timeframe: On-going
−
# Artistic license issue
+
* Add new licenses or make other changes to license list and associated web pages as needed.  Push changes to Git repository and coordinate with Gary to make sure new versions are tagged and uploaded to spdx.org
−
# futher clarification on a few previous issues (were APSL-1.0, APSL-1.1, and GPL-2.0 ever approved?)
+
 
−
# zlib/ libpng license clarification
+
== Standard Headers ==
 +
* Owner: ??
 +
* Timeframe: resolve for ??? release
 +
* the move to v2.0 creates some issues for the Standard Header field of the SPDX License List:
 +
# for the GNU family of licenses, the "or later" determination is made in the header text; pre-2.0, the GNU licenses were listed as two line items each, so the difference in the header (e.g., presence or absence of "or later') was accommodated in the Standard Header field for each license.  As of 2.0 and with the addition of the SPDX License Expression syntax the 'or later' option is exercised via the + operator.  In light of this, what do about the standard header?
 +
# Some Standard Headers have replaceable text. While the License Matching Guidelines are stated to apply to the Standard Headers, there is no markup in the Standard Headers - should there be? 
 +
# Some licenses have more than one suggestion for a Standard Header - how do we accommodate this?
 +
 
 +
== Fedora / OSI outstanding issues ==
 +
* Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
 +
* Timeframe: complete by end of 2015
 
# Jabber Open Source License v1.0 – archived text here (http://archive.jabber.org/core/JOSL.pdf) is not the same as the OSI has on their site (it was OSI approved). What do we do about this? need to resolve with OSI (with goal of having on list b/c it was OSI approved and we endeavored to have all OSI licenses on SPDX list, even if old). license text also can be found at: http://code.google.com/p/jabber-net/wiki/FAQ_License
 
# Jabber Open Source License v1.0 – archived text here (http://archive.jabber.org/core/JOSL.pdf) is not the same as the OSI has on their site (it was OSI approved). What do we do about this? need to resolve with OSI (with goal of having on list b/c it was OSI approved and we endeavored to have all OSI licenses on SPDX list, even if old). license text also can be found at: http://code.google.com/p/jabber-net/wiki/FAQ_License
 +
# various OSI approved (but old or deprecated) licenses don't have corresponding link on OSI site; OSI to update and then SPDX to add link to SPDX-LL - check this??
 +
# other issues with Fedora list, identified when we went through that
  
−
==License Matching Guidelines - implement markup==
+
== Fedora / SPDX short identifiers comparison and review ==
−
once final method for markup has been decided upon, we will need to go through all licenses on current list and create appropriate markup files for each.  Legal team will divvy up work and may ask for help from technical team as well.  We will invariably find issues that will need to be discussed along the way - using the legal team bi-weekly calls for such discusssion
+
* Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
 +
* Timeframe: complete by end of 2015
 +
* Need to finish creating spreadsheet with comparison chart and then send to / confer with Tom Calloway at Fedora
  
−
==GPL exceptions ==
+
== Composite Licenses ==
−
owner: Tom Vidal  (goal to have this reasonably done by end of June)
+
* Owner: Sam Ellis?
−
* We don't have them all and there are also the issue of inconsistencies "in the wild" among named exceptions and actual text (i.e. not all exceptions found called Foo exception have the exact same text; how do we deal with this?)
+
* Timeframe: future
 +
* some licenses currently on the SPDX License List are actually composite licenses or license stacks; should these be broken apart and the SPDX License Expression used? Some discussion on this issue took place earlier this year, see: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2015-01-08
 +
* determined that this would require a case-by-case review and should be targeted for post-2.0 timeframe
  
−
==Community outreach and list coordination==
+
== Add a Suggested Header field to SPDX License List ==
−
Goal of coordinating with various other license lists to make sure SPDX has licenses from these lists and check short name matching (or create "translation" document if different)
+
* Owner: Mark Gisi
 +
* Timeframe: future
 +
* proposal to add a field for a recommended header for licenses that do not have a Standard Header. Some discussion here: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2015-04-30
  
−
===Fedora license list===
+
== Community Outreach ==
−
owner: Paul Madick (goal to have first pass for Legal Team to begin reviewing by mid-June)
+
* what would this look like?
−
*will need to check lists for discrepancies, i.e. are there licenses on Fedora list that are not on SPDX-LL and if so, decide to add; also need to create short-name matching matrix due to Fedora using different type of categorization for its short names
+
  
−
===FOSSology===  
+
== Other projects from 2014 list ==
 +
=== Legal Team recruitment and initiation ===
 +
* how do we get more people involved?
 +
* when new people join, should we assign them an SPDX "buddy' to help answer questions and otherwise shepherd them into the group?
 +
* who to target and how to reach them?
 +
* ask for help from LF or via grassroots effort or both? other ideas?
 +
 
 +
=== Alignment with other license lists ===
 +
Coordinate with various other license lists to make sure SPDX has licenses from these lists and check short name matching (or create "translation" document if different)
 +
 
 +
==== FOSSology====  
 
owner: TBD assigned  
 
owner: TBD assigned  
−
*coordinate with Bob Gobeille, see http://www.fossology.org/projects/fossology/wiki/MatchSPDXLicenceIDs
+
* coordinate with Bob Gobeille, see http://www.fossology.org/projects/fossology/wiki/MatchSPDXLicenceIDs
  
−
===Gentoo===  
+
====Gentoo====  
 
owner: TBD assigned  
 
owner: TBD assigned  
  
−
===Suse===  
+
====Suse====  
 
owner: TBD assigned
 
owner: TBD assigned
−
*list found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AqPp4y2wyQsbdGQ1V3pRRDg5NEpGVWpubzdRZ0tjUWc (courtesy of Ciaran Farrell from 6/27/12 email list thread)
+
* list found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AqPp4y2wyQsbdGQ1V3pRRDg5NEpGVWpubzdRZ0tjUWc (courtesy of Ciaran Farrell)
−
 
+
−
==Website updates==
+
−
owner: Jilayne
+
−
# remove wiki pages where final website page has been moved/created - '''DONE''' )for License Inclusion Guidelines and moved background info to Past Decisions section)
+
−
# update license matching guidelines (currently in two places - on webpage and on wiki - remove from wiki and only update on webpage) - '''UPDATED''' on main page, with suggestions from 4/16 Collab Summit meeting; used generic reference to "mark-up" for now - will need to update this, once exact implementation of mark-up has been decided upon. 
+
−
# formatting on overview page - '''DONE'''
+
−
 
+
−
==License Ref short identifiers==
+
−
better way to identify licenses not on SPDX-LL (spec issue) or to reference other external license list that have greater set of licenses than SPDX-LL
+
  
−
== Recommendations or guidance on how to best determine license for a particular file==
+
=== Recommendations or guidance on how to best determine license for a particular file ===
 
'how to identify the license for an open source project - ex. Within the file versus whether there's a copying file on top of the directory ? provide guidance/suggstion (industry practice?) that license in the file is more determinate than the license in the directoryShould the legal group aggregate industry best practices and come up with a group of guidelines and provide some influence on that?
 
'how to identify the license for an open source project - ex. Within the file versus whether there's a copying file on top of the directory ? provide guidance/suggstion (industry practice?) that license in the file is more determinate than the license in the directoryShould the legal group aggregate industry best practices and come up with a group of guidelines and provide some influence on that?
  
 
[[Category:Legal]]
 
[[Category:Legal]]

Latest revision as of 21:47, 6 January 2016

SPDX Legal Team projects for 2015

We will try to not delete items, but mark them as "DONE" to serve as a record of progress over the course of the year.

LAST UPDATED: 5 May 2015

Licenses Under Review

Update & Maintain SPDX License List

  • Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
  • Timeframe: On-going
  • Add new licenses or make other changes to license list and associated web pages as needed. Push changes to Git repository and coordinate with Gary to make sure new versions are tagged and uploaded to spdx.org

Standard Headers

  • Owner: ??
  • Timeframe: resolve for ??? release
  • the move to v2.0 creates some issues for the Standard Header field of the SPDX License List:
  1. for the GNU family of licenses, the "or later" determination is made in the header text; pre-2.0, the GNU licenses were listed as two line items each, so the difference in the header (e.g., presence or absence of "or later') was accommodated in the Standard Header field for each license. As of 2.0 and with the addition of the SPDX License Expression syntax the 'or later' option is exercised via the + operator. In light of this, what do about the standard header?
  2. Some Standard Headers have replaceable text. While the License Matching Guidelines are stated to apply to the Standard Headers, there is no markup in the Standard Headers - should there be?
  3. Some licenses have more than one suggestion for a Standard Header - how do we accommodate this?

Fedora / OSI outstanding issues

  • Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
  • Timeframe: complete by end of 2015
  1. Jabber Open Source License v1.0 – archived text here (http://archive.jabber.org/core/JOSL.pdf) is not the same as the OSI has on their site (it was OSI approved). What do we do about this? need to resolve with OSI (with goal of having on list b/c it was OSI approved and we endeavored to have all OSI licenses on SPDX list, even if old). license text also can be found at: http://code.google.com/p/jabber-net/wiki/FAQ_License
  2. various OSI approved (but old or deprecated) licenses don't have corresponding link on OSI site; OSI to update and then SPDX to add link to SPDX-LL - check this??
  3. other issues with Fedora list, identified when we went through that

Fedora / SPDX short identifiers comparison and review

  • Owner: Jilayne Lovejoy
  • Timeframe: complete by end of 2015
  • Need to finish creating spreadsheet with comparison chart and then send to / confer with Tom Calloway at Fedora

Composite Licenses

  • Owner: Sam Ellis?
  • Timeframe: future
  • some licenses currently on the SPDX License List are actually composite licenses or license stacks; should these be broken apart and the SPDX License Expression used? Some discussion on this issue took place earlier this year, see: http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2015-01-08
  • determined that this would require a case-by-case review and should be targeted for post-2.0 timeframe

Add a Suggested Header field to SPDX License List

Community Outreach

  • what would this look like?

Other projects from 2014 list

Legal Team recruitment and initiation

  • how do we get more people involved?
  • when new people join, should we assign them an SPDX "buddy' to help answer questions and otherwise shepherd them into the group?
  • who to target and how to reach them?
  • ask for help from LF or via grassroots effort or both? other ideas?

Alignment with other license lists

Coordinate with various other license lists to make sure SPDX has licenses from these lists and check short name matching (or create "translation" document if different)

FOSSology

owner: TBD assigned

Gentoo

owner: TBD assigned

Suse

owner: TBD assigned

Recommendations or guidance on how to best determine license for a particular file

'how to identify the license for an open source project - ex. Within the file versus whether there's a copying file on top of the directory ? provide guidance/suggstion (industry practice?) that license in the file is more determinate than the license in the directoryShould the legal group aggregate industry best practices and come up with a group of guidelines and provide some influence on that?

Retrieved from "https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?title=Legal_Team/Current_Projects_and_Issues&oldid=3760"