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

Re: DEP5: ready for CANDIDATE?

Hi Lars,

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:49:02PM +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> All of the below is now done, I've today done the final bits by
> splitting BSD into BSD-[234]-clause and renaming some licenses to match
> the names in SPDX.

Reading over the present contents of http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/, I
find the license descriptions to be quite ambiguous.  The reason for
avoiding the names "2-clause BSD" and "3-clause BSD" in general is that it
does not specify *which* clauses have been dropped from the original BSD
licenses, and at various times, various parties have chosen to drop
*different* of the original four clauses.

Indeed, if you compare with <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses>,
you'll find that the most common "2-clause" reduction of the BSD license is
the one used by FreeBSD; but the FreeBSD license is listed as a separate
line item in the list of license short names.  And the code that is actually
copyright UC Berkeley has only ever been relicensed under a 3-clause
license, not under a 2-clause license.

I don't know that there need to be any normative changes to correct this,
but I think there definitely need to be some clearer pointers to an external
reference for the license definitions for these short names.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: