On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:10 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 29 2021 at 11:44, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > preferred. A summary of benefits why projects outside of Linux might
> > prefer to use copyleft-next >= 0.3.1 over GPLv2:
> >
> <snip>
> >
> > o copyleft-next has a 'built-in or-later' provision
>
> Not convinced that this is a benefit under all circumstances, but that's
> a philosopical problem. The real problem is this:
>
> > +Valid-License-Identifier: copyleft-next-0.3.1
>
> and
>
> > +11. Later License Versions
> > +
> > + The Copyleft-Next Project may release new versions of copyleft-next,
> > + designated by a distinguishing version number ("Later Versions").
> > + Unless I explicitly remove the option of Distributing Covered Works
> > + under Later Versions, You may Distribute Covered Works under any Later
> > + Version.
>
> If I want to remove this option, then how do I express this with a SPDX
> license identifier?
Probably off-topic but: I think as things currently stand in SPDX you
would have to use an ad hoc LicenseRef- identifier to express the
entirety of copyleft-next-0.3.1 coupled with an amendment that sort of
strikes the later versions provision. This issue is also somewhat
relevant: https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/issues/153
FWIW, built-in 'or-later' clauses are actually common in copyleft open
source licenses; the GPL family is the oddity here. (Then again, the
whole idea of a downstream license upgradability option is sort of
unusual in the bigger scheme of things, but that's another topic.)
Richard
