| 1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2018, Robin H Johnson wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I've been wondering if we can switch outright to using SPDX-based |
| 4 |
> expressions inside our USE-flag conditionals. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> For the entries we have in licenses/ that are not presently covered by |
| 7 |
> SPDX licenses or exceptions, we'll need additions*, but it will shrink |
| 8 |
> the licenses directory significantly. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
How so? We currently have 740 licenses, but only 18 named *exception*. |
| 11 |
That's not much potential for saving, to start with. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> * We have some open-source exceptions & closed-source licenses that |
| 14 |
> are not in SPDX |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
You've answered your own question. :-) The SPDX list has only incomplete |
| 17 |
coverage. So in any case, we will need our own labels for a large |
| 18 |
fraction of licenses. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Also, what would we do if a license is added to the SPDX list later, but |
| 21 |
with a label different from ours? Do we change all our ebuilds then? |
| 22 |
What if they change their label between versions of their standard? |
| 23 |
They've just proven that their labels aren't guaranteed to be stable, |
| 24 |
not even for major licenses like the GPL. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Ulrich |
Archives