Hi Arthur,

"Arthur A. Gleckler" <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> writes:

> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 8:31 PM Maxim Cournoyer <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> It's agreeable to me, with the exception of the emphasized text from 2b,
>> which should be dropped as *all* files require a SPDX-License-Identifier
>> for 'reuse lint' to pass in 3.
>>
>
> Okay, I've removed it, but I'm still hoping that John will chime in.
>
> Note that the "provided that there exists appropriate metadata for that
> license" in 2b may result, rarely, in a file not having metadata.  I'm not
> willing to hold up the SRFI process to get that metadata registered, but I
> welcome volunteers, as always.

Ah, I had overlooked that bit.  The rare custom licenses used can be
satisfied by extracting their license text to
LICENSES/LicenseRef-Custom-Name.txt and referring to it via a

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
# SPDX-License-Identifier: LicenseRef-Custom-Name
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

comment.  I believe 2b could be reworded as:

   b) If the format of a file supports comments, and the file is at
   least fifteen lines long, it MUST contain a copyright notice. It must
   also contain the corresponding SPDX metadata. If the file uses a
   custom license, the SPDX LicenseRef strategy should be employed
   [0]. If a file is a derivative work, it may also include the license
   of the original work, or a reference to it, if that is required by
   the license of the original work.

   [0]  https://reuse.software/faq/#custom-license

This way 'reuse lint' would still pass.  We could even make it a MUST
that this requirement must be met, as there's no technical reason it
cannot be.

--
Thanks,
Maxim