Re: Jam: which licence is this?

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hi Mark,

Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:

> Hi Jack,
>
> Jack Hill <jackhill@jackhill.us> writes:
>
>> I'm working on packaging the Argyll Color Management System for Guix. To 
>> build, it uses the Jam tool, which has the following license:
>>
>> ```
>> This is Release 2.5 of Jam, a make-like program.
>>
>> License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
>> freely, as long as this copyright notice is retained and modifications
>> are clearly marked.
>>
>> ALL WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED.
>> ```
>>
>> Which license is this?
>
> Thanks very much for your diligence here.
>
> I looked into it, and Debian calls this the "Perforce" license.  The
> "copyright" file for Debian's 'boost' package includes the following
> lines:
>
> License: Perforce
>  License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
>  freely, as long as this copyright notice is retained and modifications
>  are clearly marked.
>  .
>  ALL WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED.
>
> <https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/b/boost1.67/boost1.67_1.67.0-13+deb10u1_copyright>
>
> Maybe this should be added to (guix licenses) as 'perforce', or perhaps
> 'perforce-jam'?

Unless that license is commonly used enough, I would rather not bloat
the licenses list in Guix and instead use the non-copyleft procedure to
define it on the spot, if needed.

Does that make sense?

Maxim