The PR adding Prosperity to the SPDX list is alive again:
Quoting @kemitchell from that thread:
The SPDX process isn’t an open-ended referendum on license quality, or a popularity contest. That’s what OSI and the Linux distro licensing committees are for.
There are plenty of licenses on the list I take it you’d dub problematic. There are several arguably permissive licenses that another organization I’m involved in, Blue Oak Council, call out as problematic by ID. The value of SPDX identification is being able to name and recognize welcome as well as unwelcome terms in the wild, for whatever counts as welcome and unwelcome in context.
People are using Prosperity for their work and running into it in code and package repositories. Both licensors and licensees would benefit from an SPDX ID.
Well said. This is an example of the FUD that ANY new licenses are going to face.
And for those that don’t know SPDX, here’s their about from their GitHub org:
A standard format for communicating the components, licenses and copyrights associated with a software package.
The just release a new version of their list without Prosperity. Joy.