Steve Winslow

Thanks @chadwhitacre! When I had checked previously (before just now), I think the link and text of the license (including the abbreviation inside it) were still using "Apache-2.0". I see...

Thanks all for the patience. Given the change to "ALv2" in place of "Apache-2.0" for this submission, I believe that resolves the only remaining issue. So I am marking this...

PR #2698 submitted to add this

One preliminary note: The bullet numbering is different for the [website version](https://ubuntu.com/legal/font-licence) vs. the [plain text version](https://assets.ubuntu.com/v1/81e5605d-ubuntu-font-licence-1.0.txt). (e.g., section 2.3.1 vs. 2.c.i) That isn't a problem for SPDX matching purposes,...

+1 to add as a new license. For the name / ID, I think what @voxik proposed is fine too, though I might suggest capitalizing the "R" in the ID...

@jlovejoy I'm not sure I'm in favor of adding a new operator for this use case: - As you mentioned, it would require modifying the spec. But not only the...

Hi @chadwhitacre, thanks for submitting this! Appreciate your initial comments above on the application of the [license inclusion principles](https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/license-inclusion-principles.md). I'll follow up with some thoughts and an actual review of...

(comment 1 of 3) Hello all, I'm adding my comments below from my perspective of applying the [license inclusion principles](https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/DOCS/license-inclusion-principles.md) to the licenses proposed here and also in #2459. This...

(comment 2 of 3) Here's my own take on applying the license inclusion principles to this and #2459. Since the only difference between these is whether it switches to MIT...

(comment 3 of 3) Assuming for the moment that these are approved to be added to the License List (if you disagree with that, please respond first to my preceding...