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
