[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Savannah-register-public] Re: [task #9791] Submission of ForgePlucker
From: |
Eric S. Raymond |
Subject: |
[Savannah-register-public] Re: [task #9791] Submission of ForgePlucker |
Date: |
Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:57:12 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
Nicodemo Alvaro <address@hidden>:
>
> Follow-up Comment #4, task #9791 (project administration):
>
> It just recently clicked in my head that the big reason why we require a
> clear and precise license notice is that many projects have a file called
> COPYING and so this will create a mess when there is a project that includes
> your code or vice versa. Does that to you justify the need for the full
> modified BSD license notice? If not I still have not received your indication
> of why. Have you already submitted it to address@hidden
No.
> For the record, I privately sent you the below message.
>
> > Yes, please send me your explanation. I will send the message to
> > licensing and cc you and savannah-hackers. How does that sound?
> >
> > There are a few things I was thinking about that to them make it
> > essential to have the full license. If you see the GNU GPL license
> > notice you will see that there are three things defined. There is no
> > warranty, where you can get the license if it was not given to you, and
> > which license the program is under. Free software allows you to copy
> > any part of the code. Since the code and license are separate it's easy
> > to forget to copy the license.
I didn't receive the previous.
I think I understand now. You want a full license in each header
because you think inclusion by reference to a COPYING file might lead
to the link to the full COPYING file being lost when someone else
picks up the code.
For myself, I think this is not a case worth worrying about. Unlike
someone attaching GPL, I don't have any derivative-works conditions I
want to impose on downstream parities. So as long as they don't
remove my copyright, whether they read the COPYING file actually
matters very little to me; anyone who reads "new BSD license" will
know what I want without having to read that file.
But there's an easy solution to this "problem". I can say "BSD license",
include an URL to the canonical BSD license at OSI and remove COPYING
entirely. For your purposes, this might be better.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>