[Catalog-sig] trove - LGPL v3 not recognised?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 08:06:12PM -0500, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 11/13/2011 7:37 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> 
> >I would propose the following classifiers based on the common scenarios
> >I see everyday:
> >
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v2 (LGPLv2)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v3 (LGPLv3)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v2 or later (LGPLv2+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v3 or later (LGPLv3+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v2 (GPLv2)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v3 (GPLv3)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v2 or later (GPLv2+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v3 or later (GPLv3+)
> 
> Is the classifier depth limited to 3, or can we do instead add
> optional fourth level classifiers :: v2, :: v2 or later, :: v3, and
> :: v3 or later to the current three level classifiers.
> License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License (GPL)
> License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Library or Lesser General Public
> License (LGPL)
> 
> I am presuming that one can now search for 'OSI Approved', in which
> case this alternative would make it possible to search for GPL or
> LGPL without the fourth specifier.
> 
I don't know about the technical possibility but I did consider proposing
something along those lines instead of expanding the third level.  The
reasons I didn't were:

1) The other licenses which have versions attached to them do not place the
   version into a fourth level
2) The utility of searching like that is limited.  If I'm searching for
   particular licenses, it's typically because I need to know whether the
   license is compatible with some other license.  The GPL v2 and versoin
   3 licenses are not compatible with each other.  GPLv2+ would be
   compatible with both.  GPLv3+, once again would not.

   With this in mind, it seemed like code which used the trove license
   categories would need to operate on each license+version independently,
   even if we grouped them that way in the categorization scheme.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111114/d21bf83a/attachment.pgp>