Francesco Poli wrote: > On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:22:56 -0800 Josh Triplett wrote: >>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. > > You are quite right! > I would think that the following licenses belong in > /usr/share/common-licenses/ : > > GPL-2 LGPL-2 LGPL-2.1 > --- as they are just now > > 2-clause-BSD > --- as in http://www.fsf.org/licenses/info/BSD_2Clause.html > > 3-clause-BSD > --- as in http://www.fsf.org/licenses/info/BSD_3Clause.html > > Expat-MIT > --- as in http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt > > X11-MIT > --- as in http://www.x.org/Downloads_terms.html > > Maybe a wishlist bug should be filed against the base-files package... > What do you think? I agree with this entirely. - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature