add GNU licenses with new identifiers (-only and -or-later) #542

jlovejoy · 2017-12-21T23:08:32Z

GPL-1.0-only or GPL-1.0-or-later
GPL-2.0-only or GPL-2.0-or-later
GPL-3.0-only or GPL-3.0-or-later
LGPL-2.0-only or LGPL-2.0-or-later
LGPL-2.1-only or LGPL-2.1-or-later
LGPL-3.0-only or LGPL-3.0-or-later
FDL-1.1-only or FDL-1.1-or-later
FDL-1.2-only or FDL-1.2-or-later
FDL-1.3-only or FDL-1.3-or-later
AGPL-3.0-only or AGPL-3.0-or-later

license text is same for each set
ensure standard header reflect correct wording for each one

zvr · 2017-12-23T11:58:43Z

The FDL ones are actually GFDL ;)

zvr · 2017-12-23T13:36:32Z

I assume that this does not affect the isOsiApproved attribute...

I mean, if GPL-2.0 was approved, then GPL-2.0-only and GPL-2.0-or-later are also marked as approved.

zvr · 2017-12-23T14:43:58Z

Submitted #553

wking · 2017-12-27T19:09:41Z

Why is AGPL-1.0 not receiving the same treatment?

wking · 2017-12-27T19:52:09Z

I still think this explicit-license-list-entry approach (vs. versioning operators) is going to make it difficult to GPL proxy declarations in the future. I realize that this is the approach adopted by the legal team after lots of discussion, but thought I'd add a final mention here in case there's a last-minute change of heart or anything ;).

wking · 2017-12-28T00:18:13Z

With #553 merged, what's left here? Just the AGPL-1.0 handling?

zvr · 2017-12-28T11:22:46Z

As far as I can tell, AGPL-1.0 was a license by Affero, not by the Free Software Foundation and they never raised an issue regarding "or later".

wking · 2017-12-28T15:36:07Z

On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:22:47AM +0000, Alexios Zavras (zvr) wrote: As far as I can tell, AGPL-1.0 was a license by Affero, not by the Free Software Foundation…

Right.

… and they never raised an issue regarding "or later".

Is our use of -only and -or-later license names really as narrow as “we only use these if the steward complains about version operators”? The AGPL-1.0 has a §9 [1] which is very similar to the GPL-2.0's [2]. Both contain the: If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by {the Free Software Foundation|Affero, Inc}. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by {the Free Software Foundation|Affero, Inc}. which seemed to be the trigger for this issue. The AGPL-1.0 *also* ties the “any later version” grant to the GPL-3.0+ in their §9, and they've cut an AGPL-2.0 [3] as a shim to allow folks to use an “any later version” grant to go from AGPL-1.0+ → AGPL-2.0+ → AGPL-3.0+ [4]. So this seems like *exactly* the same situation as the GPL family. I'd like to keep our handling consistent. I much prefer using version operators, but if the intention is to use specific licenses to cover these explicit-versioning grants, I'd rather drag the CDDL family and the AGPL-1.0 along too instead of having two separate approaches to the same problem. [1]: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/1802f8491db2574a093fde665f08672a5d069189/src/AGPL-1.0.xml#L231-L243 [2]: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/1802f8491db2574a093fde665f08672a5d069189/src/GPL-2.0.xml#L336-L349 [3]: http://www.affero.org/agpl2.html [4]: http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html

jlovejoy · 2017-12-28T17:56:54Z

I am conferring with the FSF as to AGPL-1.0 - I will make the appropriate changes as needed when I get feedback there. No further discussion needed at this point.

wking · 2018-01-11T18:27:41Z

I am conferring with the FSF as to AGPL-1.0

Have we heard back on this? I'd like to get this and #543 closed off so we can close the 3.0 milestone, since it's strange to have that milestone open after we've cut the 3.0 release. If it will take more time to address the AGPL-1.0, we may want to move this issue to the 3.1 milestone.

jlovejoy · 2018-01-11T21:56:17Z

oops, yes, we have and I have confirmed that we should treat AGPL-1.0 that same) as we suspected.
@zvr or @wking can one of you do a PR for those? (I'll change the label on this and the other issue in the meantime, since this is now a 3.1 release item)

Thanks!

wking · 2018-01-11T22:54:26Z

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:56:18PM +0000, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote: oops, yes, we have and I have confirmed that we should treat AGPL-1.0 that same) as we suspected.

Do we want to add an entry for the AGPL-2.0 [1]? A potential use-case would be to record the path for folks seeing to transition from AGPL-1.0-or-later to AGPL-3.0-or-later in case the www.affero.org copy goes away (or even if it stays, to make it easier to talk about that transition using SPDX identifiers). I'm not sure how many active projects are still under the AGPL-1.0, so maybe recording the path is not an issue. [1]: http://www.affero.org/agpl2.html

jlovejoy · 2018-01-11T23:59:28Z

no need to add AGPLv2 - we vetted that conversation way back with key folks who knew the history and it was decided not to add it then. So, no need to revisit now! :)

Similar to 30cfeab (Merge pull request spdx#553 from spdx/new_GPL_identifiers, 2017-12-27). On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 09:56:54AM -0800, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [1]: > I am conferring with the FSF as to AGPL-1.0 - I will make the > appropriate changes as needed when I get feedback there. No further > discussion needed at this point. On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:56:18PM +0000, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [2]: > ... I have confirmed that we should treat AGPL-1.0 that same) as we > suspected. I asked about adding an identifier for the AGPL-2.0, and Jilayne replied: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:59:28PM -0800, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [3]: > no need to add AGPLv2 - we vetted that conversation way back with > key folks who knew the history and it was decided not to add it > then. So, no need to revisit now! :) There's some list discussion around the AGPL-2.0 starting with [4]. My main concern would be preserving the bridge in case affero.org goes down and someone wants to transition an AGPL-1.0-or-later project to AGPL-3.0-or-later. To mitigate my concerns (and avoid surprising folks using AGPL-1.0-or-later), I've discussed the licenses available in a <notes> entry. And just to be safe, here's the whole license text from [5] in a form that will be available in the Git history: AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, November 2007 Copyright © 2007 Affero Inc. 510 Third Street - Suite 225, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA This is version 2 of the Affero General Public License. It gives each licensee permission to distribute the Program or a work based on the Program (as defined in version 1 of the Affero GPL) under the GNU Affero General Public License, version 3 or any later version. If the Program was licensed under version 1 of the Affero GPL "or any later version", no additional obligations are imposed on any author or copyright holder of the Program as a result of a licensee's choice to follow this version 2 of the Affero GPL. [1]: spdx#542 (comment) [2]: spdx#542 (comment) [3]: spdx#542 (comment) [4]: https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/2013-November/001033.html Subject: GNU [?] Affero General Public License v1.0 Date: Tue Nov 5 19:39:29 UTC 2013 [5]: http://www.affero.org/agpl2.html

wking · 2018-01-12T00:55:31Z

no need to add AGPLv2 - we vetted that conversation way back with key folks who knew the history and it was decided not to add it then.

For the curious, I've turned up an entry-point to that discussion here.

wking · 2018-01-12T01:20:13Z

Can someone with write access close the 3.0 milestone now that it's complete? There should be a button here.

Similar to 30cfeab (Merge pull request spdx#553 from spdx/new_GPL_identifiers, 2017-12-27). On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 09:56:54AM -0800, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [1]: > I am conferring with the FSF as to AGPL-1.0 - I will make the > appropriate changes as needed when I get feedback there. No further > discussion needed at this point. On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:56:18PM +0000, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [2]: > ... I have confirmed that we should treat AGPL-1.0 that same) as we > suspected. I asked about adding an identifier for the AGPL-2.0, and Jilayne replied: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 03:59:28PM -0800, Jilayne Lovejoy wrote [3]: > no need to add AGPLv2 - we vetted that conversation way back with > key folks who knew the history and it was decided not to add it > then. So, no need to revisit now! :) There's some list discussion around the AGPL-2.0 starting with [4]. My main concern would be preserving the bridge in case affero.org goes down and someone wants to transition an AGPL-1.0-or-later project to AGPL-3.0-or-later. To mitigate my concerns (and avoid surprising folks using AGPL-1.0-or-later), I've discussed the licenses available in a <notes> entry. And just to be safe, here's the whole license text from [5] in a form that will be available in the Git history: AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, November 2007 Copyright © 2007 Affero Inc. 510 Third Street - Suite 225, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA This is version 2 of the Affero General Public License. It gives each licensee permission to distribute the Program or a work based on the Program (as defined in version 1 of the Affero GPL) under the GNU Affero General Public License, version 3 or any later version. If the Program was licensed under version 1 of the Affero GPL "or any later version", no additional obligations are imposed on any author or copyright holder of the Program as a result of a licensee's choice to follow this version 2 of the Affero GPL. [1]: spdx#542 (comment) [2]: spdx#542 (comment) [3]: spdx#542 (comment) [4]: https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx-legal/2013-November/001033.html Subject: GNU [?] Affero General Public License v1.0 Date: Tue Nov 5 19:39:29 UTC 2013 [5]: http://www.affero.org/agpl2.html

jlovejoy added this to the Immediate Release - 3.0 milestone Dec 21, 2017

jlovejoy assigned zvr Dec 21, 2017

jlovejoy changed the title ~~add GNU licenses for new identifiers (-only and -or-later~~ add GNU licenses with new identifiers (*-only and *-or-later) Dec 21, 2017

zvr mentioned this issue Dec 23, 2017

New GNU identifiers #553

Merged

wking mentioned this issue Dec 28, 2017

appendix-IV: Refactor the license expression appendix spdx/spdx-spec#37

Closed

jlovejoy modified the milestones: Immediate Release - 3.0, 3.1 release Jan 11, 2018

wking mentioned this issue Jan 12, 2018

AGPL-1.0: Deprecate AGPL-1.0 in favor of -only and -or-later forms #599

Merged

goneall closed this as completed in #599 Jan 28, 2018

wking mentioned this issue Mar 22, 2018

Add Generic (1.0-2.5) Unported (3.0) or International (4.0) to CC license names #624

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (-only and -or-later) #542

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (-only and -or-later) #542

jlovejoy commented Dec 21, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

wking commented Dec 27, 2017

wking commented Dec 27, 2017

wking commented Dec 28, 2017

zvr commented Dec 28, 2017

wking commented Dec 28, 2017 via email

jlovejoy commented Dec 28, 2017

wking commented Jan 11, 2018

jlovejoy commented Jan 11, 2018

wking commented Jan 11, 2018 via email

jlovejoy commented Jan 11, 2018

wking commented Jan 12, 2018

wking commented Jan 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (*-only and *-or-later) #542

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (*-only and *-or-later) #542

Comments

jlovejoy commented Dec 21, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

zvr commented Dec 23, 2017

wking commented Dec 27, 2017

wking commented Dec 27, 2017

wking commented Dec 28, 2017

zvr commented Dec 28, 2017

wking commented Dec 28, 2017 via email

jlovejoy commented Dec 28, 2017

wking commented Jan 11, 2018

jlovejoy commented Jan 11, 2018

wking commented Jan 11, 2018 via email

jlovejoy commented Jan 11, 2018

wking commented Jan 12, 2018

wking commented Jan 12, 2018 • edited Loading

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (-only and -or-later) #542

add GNU licenses with new identifiers (-only and -or-later) #542

wking commented Jan 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading