Matija Šuklje

If possible, merging (at least parts of) ABOUT into REUSE makes a lot of sense to me, yes. Especially when it comes to `*.license` files and the upcoming “reuse.yaml“, there...

§3.B _could_ be fulfillable with REUSE, if we chose to adopt it, but if we do so, I would suggest to simply allow for optional comments both in the header...

I just checked the current (3.0a1) spec and it seems to me we could already abuse the `SPDX-Copyright` (soon to be `SPDX-FileCopyrightText` it seems). From what I understand the following...

On sreda, 24. julij 2019 17:14:31 CEST, Max Mehl wrote: > Thanks for the overview. I would also be rather in favour of > putting such things in an extra...

I am asking SPDX about this already. I agree, this would be best solved first in SPDX itself, and then used or allowed in REUSE.

I opened a the [thread on SPDX-Legal on this topic](https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/topic/32590067#2644) but so far no useful solution popped up. For the time being, I will use the following work-around internally, but...

I gave it a bit more thought and we could use [PackageURL](https://github.com/package-url/purl-spec) for this. I checked the SPDX spec and there is something we _could_ use, but it’s a bit...

Since this is covered by the SPDX spec which we reference to, I’d lean towards putting into FAQ. The `*GPL-*(+)` licenses were deprecated here: https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/SPDX-license-list/#a3-deprecated-licenses

That would indeed be useful, and super thanks for the PR @pietroalbini. There is just one caveat I would like us to address – namely that (even if perhaps the...

Just upgraded to 28.0.3 and this popped up in my Nextcloud: > Your web server is not properly set up to resolve "/.well-known/caldav". Further information can be found in the...