ClearlyDefined uses the string `OTHER` for the declared license when
a human has reviewed `NOASSERTION` text and found it to be a valid
license, but one without an SPDX identifier. `OTHER`, unlike
`NOASSERTION`, is not valid. With this change, when `OTHER` appears
in a license string, we'll replace it with
`LicenseRef-clearlydefined-OTHER`, which _is_ valid and will allow
the expressions to parse.
There are many packages that are dual-licensed, offering a choice
of licenses (e.g. `MIT OR Apache-2.0`). There are some that include
code from multiple sources and require multiple licenses
(e.g. `MIT AND Apache-2.0`). There are also complex combinations that
can exist for a variety of reasons, such as
`MIT AND (Apache-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause)`.
The most straightforward approach to handle these is to have an
allow list. As long as the licenses on the allow list can satisfy
the license expression of the package in question, it should pass.
To implement this, I the newest release of spdx-satisfies
which changed the interface to be exactly as described
`satisfies(license, allowList)` (see
https://github.com/jslicense/spdx-satisfies.js/pull/17).
Fixes https://github.com/actions/dependency-review-action/issues/263
Kevin Dangoor