License and copyright of specification items

[Joel Sherrill]

On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 7:32 AM Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> some specification items may contain copyrightable information. Doorstop
> removes all comments from YAML files.


Other than "it just does it", is there any explanation for this? It seems
heavy-handed
and arbitrary.


> So, my proposal is to add two
> attributes to every specification item:
>
> 1.
>
> license: 'SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause OR CC-BY-SA-4.0'
>
> This allows the use of content from specification items as source code
> and documentation input.
>
> 2.
>
> copyrights:
> - 'Copyright (C) 2019 John Doe'
>

I think I am OK with this as long as we only accept requirements with
a single license type. We just need to pick a license. If we go to
BSD-2-Clause,
then we don't have to give credit in generated documents.

For CC-BY-SA, I believe any generated document would have to give
credit to every entity with a copyright listed.

If everyone agrees that is the primary practical difference between the
two licenses, I would prefer we require all to be BSD-2-Clause.

But I am happy with the license and copyright being attributes
that are generally treated as comments.

--joel


> --
> Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
>
> Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
> Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
> Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
> E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> PGP     : Public key available on request.
>
> Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20191122/5394f40f/attachment.html>