FSF-SPDX issues in other repositories

[davidhedlund]

These issues are referenced in https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/directory.git/tree/subprojects/spdx/ISSUES

• https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/issues/93 (now Add false "isFsfLibre" value LicenseListPublisher#121)
• Add appendix describing SPDX Listed License fields spdx-spec#46

[CAM-Gerlach]

@davidhedlund Just out of curiosity, I'd be curious to know the purpose of that repo and how it intersects with this one? There didn't appear to be a high-level description of what its all actually for other than some technical discussion in the top-level readme, so I'm trying to piece together how it fits into the picture.

It seems like to distill down what is being requested here (I'm not a SPDX member myself like @goneall ), what is specifically being asked for on the code side is:

• Adding an affirmative false value for the libre tag per spdx/spdx-spec#93
• Adding a GNU GPLv3 compatibility value per Add appendix describing SPDX Listed License fields spdx-spec#46

However, at least from the perspective of this API, both of these things are provided on this side (given this API has a GPL compatibility tag, and a lack of a FSFlibre tag is de-facto a false indication, given the API only includes licenses reviewed by the FSF). So unless I'm missing something, aren't the changes needed be on the SPDX side of things (i.e. other repos), or is something else needed here to support that?

[CAM-Gerlach]

@goneall Given both of these things are already present here on the FSF API side and the limitations seem to be in the core SPDX projects that consumes it, is there something else we're missing here that needs to be addressed in our codebase, as this issue here seems to imply?

[goneall]

Given both of these things are already present here on the FSF API side and the limitations seem to be in the core SPDX projects that consumes it, is there something else we're missing here that needs to be addressed in our codebase, as this issue here seems to imply?

Yes - here's an update or plan on the 2 issues:

• issue Add false "isFsfLibre" value LicenseListPublisher#121 If I understand the issue correctly, it has already been resolved - this was just a bug in the LicenseListPublisher.
• Add appendix describing SPDX Listed License fields spdx-spec#46 is an issue in the spec I plan on addressing during 3.0.

[goneall]

@davidhedlund Since these issues are being tracked in the other repos, can we close this? I don't think there are any changes needed from the fsf-api to support either of the issues referenced.

[davidhedlund]

@davidhedlund Since these issues are being tracked in the other repos, can we close this? I don't think there are any changes needed from the fsf-api to support either of the issues referenced.

True. I tracked them in https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:SPDX_Group#Issues