Re: [Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
OK, thanks for the clarification. What do you suggest I list it as in the package description? Thanks! On 23 Nov 2004, at 13:35, David R. Morrison wrote: BSD-type licenses generally don't identify themselves as BSD. The MIT X-license also counts as a BSD-type license, for example. -- Dave On Nov 21, 2004, at 8:57 PM, Jeremy Higgs wrote: On 22 Nov 2004, at 2:03, Benjamin Reed wrote: Jeremy Higgs wrote: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. this sounds a lot like the BSD license to me Thanks, Ben! So even though it doesn't mention the BSD license in the license itself, it's alright to classify it as BSD? PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
BSD. On Nov 22, 2004, at 10:08 PM, Jeremy Higgs wrote: OK, thanks for the clarification. What do you suggest I list it as in the package description? Thanks! On 23 Nov 2004, at 13:35, David R. Morrison wrote: BSD-type licenses generally don't identify themselves as BSD. The MIT X-license also counts as a BSD-type license, for example. -- Dave On Nov 21, 2004, at 8:57 PM, Jeremy Higgs wrote: On 22 Nov 2004, at 2:03, Benjamin Reed wrote: Jeremy Higgs wrote: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. this sounds a lot like the BSD license to me Thanks, Ben! So even though it doesn't mention the BSD license in the license itself, it's alright to classify it as BSD? --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
BSD-type licenses generally don't identify themselves as BSD. The MIT X-license also counts as a BSD-type license, for example. -- Dave On Nov 21, 2004, at 8:57 PM, Jeremy Higgs wrote: On 22 Nov 2004, at 2:03, Benjamin Reed wrote: Jeremy Higgs wrote: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. this sounds a lot like the BSD license to me Thanks, Ben! So even though it doesn't mention the BSD license in the license itself, it's alright to classify it as BSD? --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
[Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
Hi everyone, I've created a package for the SilverCity, which is used to provide syntax highlighting for Trac (which I've made packages for... and have yet to commit). However, I'm not sure how to classify the licence. The licence is as follows: SilverCity Library License -- Copyright (C) 2002 by Brian Quinlan. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. Portions of SilverCity are based on Scintilla. The Scintilla license follows: License for Scintilla and SciTE Copyright 1998-2002 by Neil Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] All Rights Reserved Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation. NEIL HODGSON DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS, IN NO EVENT SHALL NEIL HODGSON BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. --- Can anyone suggest what licence category this would fit into? Thanks a lot! Jeremy. PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
Jeremy Higgs wrote: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. this sounds a lot like the BSD license to me -- Benjamin Reed, a.k.a. Ranger Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://ranger.befunk.com/ Is it considered bad form to quote one's self in a .sig? -- Me --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: InterSystems CACHE FREE OODBMS DOWNLOAD - A multidimensional database that combines robust object and relational technologies, making it a perfect match for Java, C++,COM, XML, ODBC and JDBC. www.intersystems.com/match8 ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Question about a licence classification
On 22 Nov 2004, at 2:03, Benjamin Reed wrote: Jeremy Higgs wrote: Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. this sounds a lot like the BSD license to me Thanks, Ben! So even though it doesn't mention the BSD license in the license itself, it's alright to classify it as BSD? PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
