Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 10:56:14AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: >>The text of this license is nearly identical to that in >>/usr/share/common-licenses/BSD, modulo the different copyright holder >>and the corresponding changes in the third clause and warranty >>disclaimer. Oddly, it seems that "name of the University" was replaced >>with "author" rathther than "name of the author"; I don't think that >>affects the DFSG-Freeness of the license. Other than the minor >>differences in wording, this looks like a standard 3-clause BSD license, >>which is DFSG-Free. > > The need to change that clause to use the license is one reason I prefer > the X11/MIT license; it can be used with only changes to the copyright > notice, so there are fewer trivial variations to scrutinize. Agreed. For the same reason, I wonder why one particular variant (3-clause, copyright "The Regents of the University of California") of the BSD license is included in /usr/share/common-licenses, while the standard MIT license is not. Including only one narrow variant of the BSD license in /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD seems highly error-prone, since linking to it because your package is BSD-licensed will almost always be a mistake, unless your package really is copyrighted by the Regents and under the 3-clause license. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature