Richard Freeman posted on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:05:52 -0500 as excerpted: > I think that this should at least be added. If some things are more > conservatively labeled as v2 when it should be v2+ it doesn't cause all > that much harm. Over time the licenses would get updated, and then we'd > have more useful metadata.
I agree. The problem has been finding someone who cares enough about it to push it thru the process. Keep in mind that until recently, it wasn't really practical to do anything (automated, at least) with the license metadata anyway, so whether we had the "xxx+" license specifiers or not wasn't of any real practical use anyway. Now that license sets are reasonably working, the plus licenses would actually have a practical application. So my guess is that in practice, mostly the same people (plus/minus) who cared enough to pushed license sets thru from a proposal to working practicality, will probably be the ones that, now that /that/ works, will /eventually/ push plus licenses into the mix, for much the same reason. BTW, if there's a dev (or group) willing to lead such a thing, put my name on the list as a user willing to put some time into doing the leg (aka internet) work on it. I don't know how much, but I'm certainly interested enough to want to follow developments, and will try to do some of the leg work, as I can, for the interested devs to look over and commit. Gentoo's way of course is to use bugzilla, with a tracker bug. I guess that's my permission to CC me. =:^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
