Steve Winslow

@goneall Agreed, this is old and all relevant should have been moved to spdx-3-model, so I'll go ahead and close.

I'm going to go ahead and mark this one as closed / wontfix. I think SPDX has consistently taken the position that it will enable tracking _which_ license applies, and...

Although there has been interest in the concept of tying "license namespaces" to short-form license identifiers over the past several years, community participants have not be able to agree upon...

I've commented within the sub-issues linked from here (and/or closed them) to reflect where I think these currently stand. Short version, I don't think there's anything left in here that...

I'm inclined to close this issue, as I don't think there's been any further discussion about it in nearly the past 5 years. Personally, I continue to view ";" as...

Sorry, I neglected to mention: Since the old wiki is no longer active and has been set to read-only mode, I don't think there's an action here to update that...

I don't tend to think that this should be added as a separate field in the Package definition (and definitely agree that it wouldn't work at the File level). As...

I'd suggest moving this from consideration for 2.2 to 3.0 instead, and evaluating it in the context of the optional "profiles" that are under discussion for 3.0.

Marking this as part of 0.4.0, so we can consider it together with some other potential API changes for that release.

Hi @AldoMX, thanks for asking this separately from the discussion about `NONE` in the other issue. There is no single definition of what a "proprietary" license is or is not,...