The following license classifiers incorrectly claim Open Source Initiative (OSI) approval status:
"License :: OSI Approved :: European Union Public Licence 1.0 (EUPL 1.0)"
"License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Free Documentation License (FDL)"
There may be others but those were the ones I quickly caught. In several additional cases, a license classifier claims OSI approval where the license classifier is ambiguous (typically because it can refer plausibly to more than one license associated with a name, and where one version of a license may have been OSI approved but not an earlier version).
I suppose the existence of problems of this sort might justify use of SPDX identifiers as I understand is called for in https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/
and indeed the issue of ambiguous license classifiers is noted in that PEP.
The following license classifiers incorrectly claim Open Source Initiative (OSI) approval status:
"License :: OSI Approved :: European Union Public Licence 1.0 (EUPL 1.0)"
"License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Free Documentation License (FDL)"
There may be others but those were the ones I quickly caught. In several additional cases, a license classifier claims OSI approval where the license classifier is ambiguous (typically because it can refer plausibly to more than one license associated with a name, and where one version of a license may have been OSI approved but not an earlier version).
I suppose the existence of problems of this sort might justify use of SPDX identifiers as I understand is called for in https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/ and indeed the issue of ambiguous license classifiers is noted in that PEP.
cc: @jlovejoy who may find this issue of interest