[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DEP5 and spdx shortname of license



Jonas Smedegaard:
[...]

DEP5 already encourages (but does not require) use of SPDX shortnames,
except where Debian and SPDX disagree on sensible naming.

See https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#spdx
and the historical notes at
https://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat#Differences_between_DEP5_and_SPDX

Do you have ideas on how to address the documented differences in naming
choices?

  - Jonas


Is it really that valuable for us to have a delta here compared to what upstream projects would use?

As I understand it, we are at worst talking `GPL-2.0-only` / `GPL-2.0-or-later` (SPDX) vs `GPL-2` / `GPL-2+` (DEP-5). As much as I might prefer the DEP-5 variant, I am struggling to see the advantage outweigh the cost of divergence.

With my current knowledge, I would strongly be in favor of deprecating the unique names for DEP-5 and encourage migration to fully compliant SPDX names.

Best regards,
Niels


Reply to: