[od-discuss] Storage of license texts in the repo - a first pass

[Herb Lainchbury]

I'm +1 on the shorter path.

I trying to sort out what the shorter names should be.   I was thinking we
could use something like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1 for
country codes but that obviously won't work for the smaller jurisdictions.
 Maybe we just start with names that seem to make sense to us, like:

/licenses/conformant/OGL-UK-2.0.md
/licenses/inreview/OGL-CA-2.0.md
/licenses/inreview/OGL-BC-2.0.md
/licenses/inreview/OGL-AB-2.0.md

?

H


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>wrote:

> On 26 June 2013 20:54, Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure what a directory per license buys. I'd suggest
>> /licenses/{conformant|inreview|nonconformant}/{license short name}.md
>>
>> Or if a directory per license is really needed (if envisioning lots of
>> related files being kept), the filename ought be just {license short
>> name}.md or license.md
>
>
> I just imagined we'd end up with different possible versions, english
> versus german translations etc. I'm happy with the simpler approach and on
> KISS basis let's do that - so as you suggest:
>
> /licenses/{conformant|inreview|nonconformant}/{license short name}.md
>
>
>>
>> And {license short name} really ought be same as used in
>> https://spdx.org/licenses/ or following that style.
>>
>
> We won't be storing open-source licenses (right?) so we should have the
> same short names. In terms of style what exactly is the SPDX "style"?
>
> Rufus
> *
>
> *
>



-- 
Herb Lainchbury
Dynamic Solutions Inc.
www.dynamic-solutions.com
http://twitter.com/herblainchbury
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20130627/3da8a34d/attachment-0001.html>