On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:22:56 -0800 Josh Triplett wrote: > Agreed. For the same reason, I wonder why one particular variant > (3-clause, copyright "The Regents of the University of California") of > the BSD license is included in /usr/share/common-licenses, while the > standard MIT license is not.
You are quite right! I would think that the following licenses belong in /usr/share/common-licenses/ : GPL-2 LGPL-2 LGPL-2.1 --- as they are just now 2-clause-BSD --- as in http://www.fsf.org/licenses/info/BSD_2Clause.html 3-clause-BSD --- as in http://www.fsf.org/licenses/info/BSD_3Clause.html Expat-MIT --- as in http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt X11-MIT --- as in http://www.x.org/Downloads_terms.html Maybe a wishlist bug should be filed against the base-files package... What do you think? -- Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday. ...................................................................... Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpViwb8is7kR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
