AGPL-1.0: Deprecate AGPL-1.0 in favor of -only and -or-later forms #599
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
wking
force-pushed
the
agpl-1.0-or-later
branch
from
238513c to
4aa72b8
Compare
wking
force-pushed
the
agpl-1.0-or-later
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fa85eea to
373bf50
Compare
|
@goneall, do you understand what's happening here? spdx-tools is complaining about: but I'm trying to follow the pattern used by the other GPLs in my |
goneall
requested changes
Jan 27, 2018
|
Dp you understand why the tools have the same ID twice? The other dups have different IDs. |
wking
commented
Jan 27, 2018
src/AGPL-1.0-only.xml
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,276 @@ | |||
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> | |||
| <SPDXLicenseCollection xmlns="http://www.spdx.org/license"> | |||
| <license isOsiApproved="false" licenseId="AGPL-1.0" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, need to update licenseId.
Generated with: $ sed -i 's/[[:space:]]*$//' AGPL-1.0.xml
The license text is copyright Affero Inc., and <copyrightText> is for copyright statements about content covered by the license, not for copyright statements about the license itself.
wking
force-pushed
the
agpl-1.0-or-later
branch
from
373bf50 to
96f8f64
Compare
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
I didn't even notice the duplicate ID's - just copy/pasted. It looks like the warnings are now "Duplicates licenses: AGPL-1.0-or-later, AGPL-1.0-only" which is correct. |
goneall
approved these changes
Jan 28, 2018
This was referenced Jan 29, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As requested by @jlovejoy.
I've also stripped trailing whitespace from the
AGPL-1.0to avoid introducing trailing whitespace when I copied it into the new files before updating them. This keeps the diffs minimal for easy review:I've also added a note pointing out that both
AGPL-3.0-or-laterandGPL-3.0-or-laterare available to folks redistributingAGPL-1.0-or-latercontent (although I think we'll also want the spec update for+that I've floated here).Fixes #542.
Fixes #543.