Re: Bug#458385: New version of Artistic License
gregor herrmann <email@example.com> writes:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:03:41 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Certainly if the license becomes more broadly used in the future, it
>> can be proposed for inclusion again at that time.
> Some clear criterion might be helpful (and save you some time in the
> future :))
It's a much stronger justification if the usage hits the level of the
least-frequently-used license family already in common-licenses, which at
the moment puts the bar around 850 packages. Among the things that could
change that to move the bar lower would be use as the license of very
widely-installed packages. So, for instance, if the license of perl-base
were ever changed to be the Artistic 2.0 license, I think you should
propose again at that time to include it.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>