Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: copyright attribution clarifications

[Sarah White]

On 11/23/18 4:11 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 3:51 PM Sarah White <kuzetsa@××××××××××.ovh> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/23/18 3:42 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 3:23 PM Sarah White <kuzetsa@××××××××××.ovh> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/23/18 2:46 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>>> Nobody is suggesting that multiple copyright owners shouldn't be
>>>>> allowed.  Merely that multiple copyright owners shouldn't be named in
>>>>> the copyright notice.
>>>>
>>>> The interest in removing or discouraging a more verbose,
>>>> explicit copyright notice would suggest the only legitimate
>>>> interest should be assumed to be in "gentoo authors", and
>>>> for no other entity(s) or person(s) need have any stake
>>>> in having a well-structured copyright notice (any format)
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what "well-structured" means.
>>
>> SPDX is well-structured, and was previously given
>> as an example (I believe it was in this thread)
>
> Great, so stick this in your git commit:
> SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>
> That isn't a copyright notice anyway, so I see it as orthogonal to the
> issue of notice.
>

I think there was a misunderstanding. SPDX specs have layout for more
than just licensing. (incl. layout convention for copyright notice)

-- kuza