Re: Unclarity wrt unnamed licenses in debian/copyright / DEP5
On 24. September 2014 21:55:07 MESZ, Matthijs Kooijman <matthijs@stdin.nl> wrote:
>Hi Russ,
>
>> The syntax requires some short name. I think it's fine to just use
>> something arbitrary that passes the syntax check, like
>"custom-license".
>> That's what I do.
>I'll do that, then. Since I have two custom licenses, I guess I should
>be using custom-license-1 and custom-license-2, which is even more
>ugly.
>
>Would be better if using an empty license short name would imply the
>license is custom and unique within the copyright file, but i guess
>that's something for a future version of the spec. For now, I'll just
>go
>with some arbitrary names.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Matthijs
I usually try to use some "speaking" names, so that one already gets a clue about it
--
tobi
Reply to: