search

spdx / license-list-XML

This is the repository for the master files that comprise the SPDX License List
Other
345 stars 280 forks source link

New license request: etalab-2.0 #923

Closed bzg closed 5 years ago

bzg commented 5 years ago

1. License Name: Open License 2.0 2. Short identifier: ol-2.0 3. License Author or steward: Etalab (French mission for open data : https://www.etalab.gouv.fr) 4. Comments: The license has not been submitted to OSI because it is mainly targetting open data, not open source.

If modications are required, please let me know.

Thanks! 5. Standard License Header: 6. URL: https://www.etalab.gouv.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/open-licence.pdf 7. OSI Status: Not Submitted

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Thank you @bzg for submitting this! I see the plain text of the submitted license is in the request entry at http://13.57.134.254/app/license_requests/50/

I (and others) will review the license text more closely, but a couple of initial questions come to mind:

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Sorry, one additional question:

bzg commented 5 years ago

Hi Steve,

thanks for the prompt feedback!

Steve Winslow notifications@github.com writes:

I (and others) will review the license text more closely, but a couple of initial questions come to mind:

Is "Open License 2.0" the license name? If you're affiliated with
the license steward, it would be ideal if a more specific name
could be used to refer to the license. "Open License" is pretty
general and might confuse people (as pretty much every license on
the License List is an "open license"!)

Yes, "open license 2.0" is the real name. I know it is a bad name. It is sometimes called by reusers the "Etalab license 2.0", because Etalab is the name of the mission who publishes it.

I will ask my colleagues what they think about using "Etalab license" as the name for a SPDX identifier, with etl-2.0 for short. Or maybe the "Etalab Open License" and eol-2.0. (Let me know if you think one is clearly better.)

Do you know of examples where this license is being used in the
wild? One of the factors that the team looks at, when evaluating
whether to add a license, is whether it is currently in use for
multiple projects. See here for more details about the team's
license inclusion principles at present.

The license is used by the whole open data ecosystem in France.

https://www.data.gouv.fr/fr/datasets/referentiel-de-lorganisation-administrative-de-letat/ https://www.data.gouv.fr/fr/datasets/boamp/

There are more than +2k organizations (from small cities to big ministries) using it right now.

It is also used by french administrations to publish documents. See for example the french open source policy for the public sector here:

https://github.com/DISIC/politique-de-contribution-open-source/blob/master/README.en.md

Let me know if you need more examples.

Best,

-- Bastien

bzg commented 5 years ago

Hi Steve,

Steve Winslow notifications@github.com writes:

Sorry, one additional question:

Is this English version the "official" version of the license
text? Or is there a French version that is the canonical license
text?

The French version is the canonical license text, you can find it here: https://github.com/DISIC/politique-de-contribution-open-source/blob/master/LICENSE.pdf

The english version is provided "as is", to share documents more widely.

Best,

-- Bastien

camillem commented 5 years ago

Hi Bastien, all,

Regarding the name, I think that "Etalab Open License 2.0" would be indeed much better than just "Open License". As for the ID, I think "Etalab-2.0" could be a good fit, as it's more immediately relatable to the steward of the license than just "EOL". Best, Camille

bzg commented 5 years ago

Hi Camille, thanks for your feedback. I will suggest "Etalab Open License 2.0" and etalab-2.0 internally and get back to you ASAP.

bzg commented 5 years ago

I just validated this with our legal team: we can proceed with "Etalab Open License 2.0" and "etalab-2.0". Thanks!

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Thank you @bzg! I've updated the title of this issue to reflect the change. I'll follow up in a separate comment below with my thoughts on whether the license should be added to the list.

Updated submission request details will be:

  1. License Name: Etalab Open License 2.0
  2. Short identifier: etalab-2.0
  3. License Author or steward: Etalab (French mission for open data : https://www.etalab.gouv.fr)
  4. Comments: The license has not been submitted to OSI because it is mainly targetting open data, not open source.

If modications are required, please let me know.

Thanks!

  1. Standard License Header:
  2. URL: https://www.etalab.gouv.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/open-licence.pdf
  3. OSI Status: Not Submitted
swinslow commented 5 years ago

I think this license is appropriate to add to the license list. I believe it meets the current license inclusion principles, and per @bzg's comments above it is evidently widely used by the French government.

My main question is for others on the SPDX team: according to the comments above, it appears that the French version is the "canonical" license text, and the English version is provided for convenience:

Looking to what SPDX has done in the past:

Given all of that, I'm inclined to say that here for etalab-2.0, we should follow the same pattern as CECILL-1.0: add the French version, with a note providing the link to the English translation.

@jlovejoy @bradleeedmondson or others -- would you agree?

bzg commented 5 years ago

Given all of that, I'm inclined to say that here for etalab-2.0, we should follow the same pattern as CECILL-1.0: add the French version, with a note providing the link to the English translation.

FWIW, agreed. Thanks!

bzg commented 5 years ago

Hi all, is there anything I can do to help moving forward with this? Or any hint on how long the validation process could be? I don't want to rush anyone, this is just to let you know that this issue is high on my list.

Thanks!

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Based on the prior legal team call, I believe consensus was to approve this license using the French text, and in notes to include the link to the English translation. I will ask the legal team to confirm during today's call, and hopefully we can get this in for the upcoming 3.7 release of the license list.

bzg commented 5 years ago

Great, thanks a lot.

jlovejoy commented 5 years ago

added license with #935

bzg commented 5 years ago

Thanks again for handling this. Our of curiosity, when can I expect to see the licence listed on https://spdx.org/licenses ? My next move is to update the SPDX identifier of the license on Etalab's page listing approved licenses. Thanks!

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Hi @bzg, I am expecting to push the next update of the license list (3.7) to https://spdx.org/licenses within the next couple of days.

bzg commented 5 years ago

Great, thanks a lot!

swinslow commented 5 years ago

Hi @bzg, as a heads-up, the 3.7 license list release is now live at https://spdx.org/licenses. So you should be all set to use this identifier now.

bzg commented 5 years ago

Hi @swinslow, that's great news, thanks a lot for the heads-up!