On 21/11/11 23:08, Ximin Luo wrote: > The solution: > - Specify that standalone License: stanzas are WHO- and WHAT- neutral. > - If clarification is required for a particular WHO/WHAT combination, such as > the way in which re-licensing works *in addition* to the and/or/+/exception > syntax (e.g. "GPL2+", "MPL or GPL"), this should be added to the relevant > File: stanza, in the Comment: field, or perhaps we should add a new field for > this specific purpose. > I should add, - explicitly suggest/encourage License: stanzas to refer to the "main" published license, e.g. GPL2 in the case of GPL2+. Not to diminish the important of the "+" part, but this information is generally given on a per-software basis rather than being part of a published license. (Licenses are generally bigger than "relicensing permissions" text, so we should prioritise reducing the repetition of those.) -- GPG: 4096R/5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0 https://bitbucket.org/infinity0 https://launchpad.net/~infinity0
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature