On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:30:07PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > One concern I have with the current DEP5 draft is that the set of keywords > for common licenses is very NIH. Fedora, for example, has an existing list > of license keywords that are widely deployed, as can be found here: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Software_License_List
This is a very good idea indeed!
If we manage to get a complete agreement on a set of keywords (or on a
common subset of both sets), it would be worth to point the
distributi...@freedesktop list to that set: I'm confident other distros
will be interested in adopting the very same set.
Beside that, I haven't read the last DEP-5 drafts you published, but the
previous one I've read had some sort of "license expression" syntax
which allowed to combine licenses (e.g. for dual-licensing) and to patch
them with suffixes (e.g. trailing "+"). I agree that it would be better
to drop the suffix-patching part and promote the few suffix variations
to real keywords, as Fedora does.
On the contrary, I believe we should keep the license combination
syntax, possibly checking what Fedora or others do for those cases. From
the page you mention it is not clear to me how do they express multiple
licenses ...
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
