THE SPDX WIKI IS NO LONGER ACTIVE.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"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | <p | + | <p><strong>Current issues/topics (this is a general list and may not touch upon everything) -- <em>updated May 16</em></strong></p><p><strong>1) Mission/Vision statement</strong> <br />A) Legal Work Group - revised version posted in 5/16 meeting minutes - to be finalized on 5/30 call</p><p>B) License List description and overview -revised version posted in 5/16 meeting minutes - to be finalized on 5/30 call </p><p><strong>2) Website updates and refresh</strong> <br />A) aligning language and updates on various parts of the current site:</p><ol><li>Specification refers to the license list as "Standard Short Names" - should be consistently referred to as the "SPDX License List"; also, the description needs to be revised and one of the links is probably not correct</li><li>License List info page http://spdx.org/wiki/spdx-license-list - updated as needed, Jilayne</li><li>License List main page http://spdx.org/licenses/ - calls it the "SPDX Open Source License Registry" - needs to be changed to "SPDX License List" - Gary or Martin? (add description (goal/vision) here too?)</li><li>add something about how we are coordinating or aligning with other license lists? (e.g. OSI, FSF, Debian, etc.) - either in its own section or FAQ?</li></ol><p>B) Website refresh - fill in pages, link over content ?? need update from Mark Gisi on this</p><p><strong>3) License List </strong> <br />A) License List updates for v1.16</p><ol><li>Add MPL 2.0 other header version (for time being to be consistent with GPL)</li><li>finish license text review of .txt files - still some to do</li><li>formatting/text issue for Cecill licenses in French</li><li>add US Gov't works - add short identifier to list; see email from David Wheeler</li><li>proposal to add some kind of short identifier for copyright notice only (and "all rights reserved"?" - Fedora has this, maybe adopt what they use?</li></ol><p>B) OSI updates from emails (changes to v1.16) and then summarize outstanding issues - Jilayne, in progress</p><p>C) Other issues (see issues column on latest License List download for details - to start covering with v1.16 update)</p><ol><li>GPL exceptions - we don't have them all, list some of the others and variations on text - can someone do some research on this issue?</li><li>various other more issues - see spreadsheet</li></ol><p>D) Community outreach and list coordination</p><ol><li>FSF license list match-up; found here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html -- licenses that need to be added? Jilayne has done initial pass - Paul to do further research and come up with list of those on FSF and not on SPDX for approval to be added or not</li><li>Fedora license list -- Jilayne has begun discussion with Tom Calloway, needs follow-up</li><li>Debian</li><li>Gentoo</li></ol><p><strong>3) Formatting and "master list" for License List (i.e. actual license text files)</strong> <br />Currently the "master" consists of spreadsheet with list + individual .txt files for license text field = downloadable zip file. This is then converted into html pages for website. Peter, Gary, and Jilayne have had initial discussion on this issue; to be discussed further with more fleshed out proposal</p><p>A) PROPOSAL: License text files formatted in HTML instead of .txt files as default; can convert from there into text file with tool if people want that too; Option to use HTML to indicate some of matching rules?</p><p>B) For back-end management of License List overall: proposal to use Bugzilla and GIT repository in background for management - easier tracking of changes and gets it off Jilayne's desktop</p><p><strong>4) Recommendations or guidance on how to best determine license for a particular file</strong><br />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 directory</p><p>Should the legal group aggregate industry best practices and come up with a group of guidelines and provide some influence on that?</p> |
Revision as of 18:00, 16 May 2012
Current issues/topics (this is a general list and may not touch upon everything) -- updated May 16
1) Mission/Vision statement
A) Legal Work Group - revised version posted in 5/16 meeting minutes - to be finalized on 5/30 call
B) License List description and overview -revised version posted in 5/16 meeting minutes - to be finalized on 5/30 call
2) Website updates and refresh
A) aligning language and updates on various parts of the current site:
- Specification refers to the license list as "Standard Short Names" - should be consistently referred to as the "SPDX License List"; also, the description needs to be revised and one of the links is probably not correct
- License List info page http://spdx.org/wiki/spdx-license-list - updated as needed, Jilayne
- License List main page http://spdx.org/licenses/ - calls it the "SPDX Open Source License Registry" - needs to be changed to "SPDX License List" - Gary or Martin? (add description (goal/vision) here too?)
- add something about how we are coordinating or aligning with other license lists? (e.g. OSI, FSF, Debian, etc.) - either in its own section or FAQ?
B) Website refresh - fill in pages, link over content ?? need update from Mark Gisi on this
3) License List
A) License List updates for v1.16
- Add MPL 2.0 other header version (for time being to be consistent with GPL)
- finish license text review of .txt files - still some to do
- formatting/text issue for Cecill licenses in French
- add US Gov't works - add short identifier to list; see email from David Wheeler
- proposal to add some kind of short identifier for copyright notice only (and "all rights reserved"?" - Fedora has this, maybe adopt what they use?
B) OSI updates from emails (changes to v1.16) and then summarize outstanding issues - Jilayne, in progress
C) Other issues (see issues column on latest License List download for details - to start covering with v1.16 update)
- GPL exceptions - we don't have them all, list some of the others and variations on text - can someone do some research on this issue?
- various other more issues - see spreadsheet
D) Community outreach and list coordination
- FSF license list match-up; found here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html -- licenses that need to be added? Jilayne has done initial pass - Paul to do further research and come up with list of those on FSF and not on SPDX for approval to be added or not
- Fedora license list -- Jilayne has begun discussion with Tom Calloway, needs follow-up
- Debian
- Gentoo
3) Formatting and "master list" for License List (i.e. actual license text files)
Currently the "master" consists of spreadsheet with list + individual .txt files for license text field = downloadable zip file. This is then converted into html pages for website. Peter, Gary, and Jilayne have had initial discussion on this issue; to be discussed further with more fleshed out proposal
A) PROPOSAL: License text files formatted in HTML instead of .txt files as default; can convert from there into text file with tool if people want that too; Option to use HTML to indicate some of matching rules?
B) For back-end management of License List overall: proposal to use Bugzilla and GIT repository in background for management - easier tracking of changes and gets it off Jilayne's desktop
4) 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 directory
Should the legal group aggregate industry best practices and come up with a group of guidelines and provide some influence on that?