On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 01:51:12PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> One remaining question in my mind is whether we should take the
> opportunity of a format change to achieve a few other goals. The most
> obvious one would be to reconcile our short license identifiers with SPDX
> (probably by making our identifiers a superset of the SPDX ones).
The obvious objection to that would be the fact that the SPDX
identifiers are not set in stone; a future update of the SPDX
identifiers might then conflict with one of the identifiers that we add.
Either we'd need a rule to have identifiers namespaced (say, "spdx:mit",
and then use "debian:" as a non-spdx namespace, or some such), or a rule
to not have non-SPDX identifiers.
Personally, I have a preference towards the latter; it seems simpler,
and there is benefit to be had to encourage creating a new SPDX
identifier over having a "local" fix.
--
Could you people please use IRC like normal people?!?
-- Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, trying to quiet down the buzz in the DebConf 2008
Hacklab
