Marc-Etienne Vargenau
Marc-Etienne Vargenau
Hello, I have the same problem. Why was this bug marked as invalid? Best regards, Marc-Etienne
Sorry, I was thinking of http://bugs.jqueryui.com/ticket/6018
Yes, I understand now. I hope it will get fixed. Best regards, Marc-Etienne
I would prefer to have the option named `--spdxversion`. The `--version` option should return the version of tools-java. In most tools, the `--version` option returns the version of the tool.
> Can we also add this to the Glossary as well? I have created https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/pull/801 for that.
@zvr @kestewart @bact So I understand I should replace things like: ``` [https://spdx.org/licenses/exceptions-index.html](https://spdx.org/licenses/exceptions-index.html) ``` by ``` ``` What should I do with things like: ``` [RFC 2046](https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2046.txt) ``` Should I...
Hi @zvr They were part of the spec. It was Annex B in SPDX 2.3. And in https://spdx.org/licenses/ the link "[matching guidelines](https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v2.3/license-matching-guidelines-and-templates/)" points to SPDX 2.3. It should be clarified.
Thank you @zvr What we should do: - create a web page containing the matching guidelines independent of SPDX 2.3 - have a link in [licenseText](https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v3.0/model/SimpleLicensing/Properties/licenseText/) to this page -...
Any progress on implementing this?
Very good, thank you!