On 11-07-23 at 01:32pm, Jérémy Lal wrote: > the BSD-3-clause license text changes depending as in : > "Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its > contributors" > > Should the license short name be : > BSD-3-clause-<ORGANIZATION> > as it's been done in some packages, or is it considered the very same > as BSD-3-clause, and be included once for all instances in > debian/copyright ? Well, Debian Policy requires to include the *verbatim* license. Replacing some verbs with others does not seem verbatim to me. No doubt some will disagre with me (just as some feel that files from GNU autotools need not be listed). I use separate License sections for each "flavor", indicating "derivatives" with "~" like this: License: BSD-3-clause~<ORGANIZATION> I believe above syntax is allowed by current DEP-5 syntax, and I intend to propose it as a recommended style after DEP-5 becomes official and it is sensible to do such discussions again. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature