Re: DEP-5 meta: New co-driver; current issues
On to, 2010-08-12 at 10:32 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> It would also be nice to take a hard look at the SPDX format,[1] adopt
> any good ideas from it, and try to make sure that the resultant DEP-5
> can be translated into SPDX, and vice versa. [There's no reason for us
> to do all of the hard work of copyright and license auditing and
> verification when we can colaborate with the work of others.]
I've had a look at one version of the SPDX draft, and I agree that it's
good to ensure convertability. SPDX has different goals from
debian/copyright, and seems to be even more verbose than DEP-5 (they
have no globbing, each file is listed separately), so using the exact
same format probably isn't sensible. But convertability from one format
to the other would be nice, and should not be excessively hard, either.
Reply to: