On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 00:29 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 06:10 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 20:50 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Tom spot Callaway (tcallawa@redhat.com) said:
I think the tagging per file in comments is definitely overkill.
Most packages won't need it, and for those that do, it will make the task for whomever is auditing the package (re: me) much simpler.
73 packages that I have installed have some sort of multiple licensing.
?? 90% of all perl packages are multiple licensed. These alone make several 100s of packages.
90% of perl packages are _dual_ licensed,
Yes, GPL or Artistic.
and thus, wouldn't need to do this.
I don't see this.
Not worth mentioning KDE/Qt which typically are licensed GPL*+QPL.
Also I am still missing a detailed list of all tags you want to force us to use for BSD*ish, X11*ish and other licenses
These aren't licenses. Either it is BSD or X11 or it is something else.
BS. Of cause they are licenses.
A RH owned BSD'ish license is something completely different as a UCB owned BSD'ish license. They probably are compatible but that's all.
Different copyright owners, different licensors => different licenses.
This hits esp. when licensors change their licenses, as it had been several times been the case in case of the X11 licenses.
Ralf