[WIP: new PEP] Use SPDX license expressions in Core package metadata

[pombredanne]

This is a WIP PR for discussion around a PEP to add a new Core metadata field to document license in packages and eventually retire the use of the License and Classifiers.

This has been triggered by several recent or older discussions in particular:

• https://github.com/pypa/warehouse/issues/2996
• Recommend the use of SPDX license descriptions pypa/interoperability-peps#46
• license in setup() pypa/packaging-problems#41
• Include more than one license file or other arbitrary files in metadata pypa/wheel#138
• Create draft PEP pombredanne/spdx-pypi-pep#1 (comment)

Signed-off-by: Philippe Ombredanne pombredanne@nexb.com

[the-knights-who-say-ni]

Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

Unfortunately we couldn't find an account corresponding to your GitHub username on bugs.python.org (b.p.o) to verify you have signed the CLA (this might be simply due to a missing "GitHub Name" entry in your b.p.o account settings). This is necessary for legal reasons before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for your contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

[pombredanne]

See also pypa/packaging.python.org#635

[pombredanne]

See also https://discuss.python.org/t/improving-license-clarity-with-better-package-metadata/2154

[pombredanne]

Based on the recommendation of @cjerdonek I am closing this PR and will resubmit when the draft is ready https://discuss.python.org/t/improving-license-clarity-with-better-package-metadata/2154/24?u=pombredanne

The WIP pep will be at pombredanne#2