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

Create an index page for the archived license lists #11

Closed
goneall opened this issue Mar 28, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Create an index page for the archived license lists #11

goneall opened this issue Mar 28, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Mar 28, 2018

Per suggestion from @pombredanne on the SPDX legal mailing list

  1. create a page that has links to the older versions of the LL page
  2. link this "archives" page from the current LL version
  3. link the previous version too
  4. as a bonus possibly link the preview next when this is published and mostly ready before we switch over to final

These links could be on the same line as the line that says:

"Version: 3.0 28 December 2017" or using an ISO

Something like :

Current Version: 3.0 28 December 2017 - (previous version, versions archive, next version preview, )

NOTE: following suggestions on the email suggest using an ISO 8601 to express time.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601

Version: 3.0 published on 2017-12-28

Version: 3.0 of 2017-12-28

@goneall
Copy link
Member Author

goneall commented Mar 28, 2018

From @wking

It would also be nice to be able to link to 1 in a way that will survive 3.1 getting cut.

About the URL template itself, I'd rather not repeat “archive”, and “archive” no longer feels quite right once you have an entry for the current release. I also think the /licenses/ prefix already covers “ll” (which I'm guessing is for “License List”). Wouldn't it be sufficient to use:

https://spdx.org/licenses/v3.0/

or at most:

https://spdx.org/licenses/release/v3.0/

Cheers,
Trevor

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Mar 28, 2018

Cross-linking the list thread.

  1. create a page that has links to the older versions of the LL page
  2. link this "archives" page from the current LL version

I'd rather keep this outside of LicenseListPublisher. For example, see my mock-up, which adds a landing page linking to the various releases. There is no cross-linking between the releases themselves.

JSON Schema's specifications page takes a similar approach, outlining their current releases and then linking to a separate page with links to past and current releases. This reduces clutter on the initial page if you have a lot to say there and want to de-emphasise the older releases.

RFCs get updated with forward links (“Obsoleted by” in the header, e.g. here), to gently nudge folks from obsolete releases forward into the present. I'm fine with that, but don't think it needs to be part of the LicenseListPublisher process (you can add the forward links manually in post-production).

wking added a commit to wking/license-exprs that referenced this issue Apr 20, 2018
The "at your option" language is modeled on Rust's from
rust-lang/rust@00c856c0 (Update license, add license boilerplate to
most files, 2012-12-03), although I've made it more compact by using
Markdown for the upstream license links.

I'd rather leave caller bugs to the issue tracker, but the paren bug
is an important issue for folks writing license expressions (i.e. all
crate authors), so I'm calling it out on our README until we get it
fixed.

There's an open SPDX issue about providing browsable archives for past
License List releases [1].  Until that's resolved, I'm just linking to
a tag in the release repository.

[1]: spdx/LicenseListPublisher#11
@goneall
Copy link
Member Author

goneall commented Sep 6, 2021

Since you can now access previous versions of the website and license list easily on Github license-list-data, I'm closing this (rather old) issue.

@goneall goneall closed this as completed Sep 6, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants