[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: kissfft

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

Reply to: