Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move [L] license tags to SPDX identifiers #142

Open
svmhdvn opened this issue Nov 19, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Move [L] license tags to SPDX identifiers #142

svmhdvn opened this issue Nov 19, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@svmhdvn
Copy link

svmhdvn commented Nov 19, 2023

We should be using standardized license identifiers[0] in all packages to distinguish between the various versions of licenses and clarify cases where dual licensing applies. From the FAQ[1]:

Q: How does one represent a file or package that is dual licensed (i.e., a license choice)?
A: SPDX license information can be represented using conjunctive or disjunctive regular expressions. For example, a file that is dual licensed under either the GPL-2.0 or MIT would be represented using the following disjunctive expression: (GPL-2.0 or MIT).

I can handle this task if you'd like, I love tedious and boring churn tasks like this.

[0] https://spdx.org/licenses/
[1] https://wiki.spdx.org/view/SPDX_FAQ

@rxrbln
Copy link
Owner

rxrbln commented Nov 19, 2023

The currently used licenses are from historically only having a docent, like GPL, BSD, MIT, ... and we already support listing multiple, like GPL BSD … and started to have versioned one like GPL3.

Do you want to propose a patch or maybe better set of sed regex mass substitute our use cases?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants