Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Map licenses to SPDX identifiers #65

Closed
kraih opened this issue Jan 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Map licenses to SPDX identifiers #65

kraih opened this issue Jan 26, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@kraih
Copy link
Member

kraih commented Jan 26, 2023

Much of our license pattern data predates the existence of SPDX, so we rely on mostly arbitrarily chosen identifiers. Recently there has been growing interest in reports that also include SPDX identifiers. This has many advantages, such as the ability to exchange reports in standard formats with tools like Fossology. Which in turn would also allow us to cooperate more with open source projects like OSSelot (see #64).

@kraih kraih added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 26, 2023
@kraih
Copy link
Member Author

kraih commented Jan 26, 2023

As a first step it would probably make sense to update our database schema with an optional SPDX expression in addition to the current legacy license identifier. And add support for it to the UI. Afterwards we can slowly fill in the missing data, which can then be utilised in future updates to our reports.

Alternatively we could also try to replace the current license identifiers with SPDX expressions. We would have to be careful about possible side effects of such changes however.

@kraih
Copy link
Member Author

kraih commented Jul 28, 2023

We now have more than 500 licenses mapped and fully support SPDX.

@kraih kraih closed this as completed Jul 28, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant