[License-discuss] Improvement to the License-Review Process
VM (Vicky) Brasseur
vmbrasseur at opensource.org
Tue Aug 25 22:54:54 UTC 2020
McCoy Smith wrote on 25/8/20 15:41:
> Interestingly enough, the original submission of the Vaccine License to the
> OSI had what appears to be a phony SPDX designation, "SPDX: Vaccine-1.0 "
> included in the submitted license text.
> Not sure if they were trying to give the license an air of acceptance, or if
> they also simultaneously asked SPDX for that designation to be accepted and
> it was turned down using the criteria above.
It's easy enough to check. The SPDX License List process is all via
GitHub issues (and works great, btw…hint hint…).
As this search shows, there's never been an issue filed with the word
'vaccine' in it:
A license sent to this list having an SPDX identifier in it would be a
bit weird, but could imply a desired ID rather than an approved or faked
one. Though the two processes can work in parallel so there's always the
possibility that a license is approved for SPDX before it's
proposed/approved here. I can't imagine it'd happen very often, but it's
More information about the License-discuss