Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 21.12.2014, 18:54 +0000 schrieb Clint Adams:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 09:36:02AM -0600, Christopher Reichert wrote:
> > This slipped by me yesterday. Is this the string we should be using for
> > the copyright license field?
>
> In debian/copyright, yes. "License: BSD3" is a prohibited line in the
> machine-readable copyright format.
prohibited is a bit too string. The spec says
First line: an abbreviated name for the license, or expression
giving alternatives (see the Short name section for a list of
standard abbreviations). If there are licenses present in the
package without a standard short name, an arbitrary short name
may be assigned for these licenses. These arbitrary names are
only guaranteed to be unique within a single copyright file.
so saying BSD3 is and arbitrary name and hence at least good as saying
"foo-license".
Until there are actual machines that read the so-called machine-readable
copyright file, there are better ways to spend your time than replacing
BSD3 with BSD-3-clause.
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: F0FBF51F
JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part