Ben Finney <bign...@debian.org> writes: > Ole Streicher <oleb...@debian.org> writes: > >> Change from the original BSD-3-Clause is that the originally second >> condition is merged/simplified with the first, and the third is >> renamed. >> >> What short name should I assign to it? > > I would advise that the name should not invite confusion with the > existing license texts that actually are published prominently for the > Berkeley Standard Distribution. > > In other words, if this is not identical with an existing widely-known > BSD license text, don't use BSD in the name. > > You could instead choose a short name that is specific to that work. > e.g. “License: CISCO-CSA”.
Wouldn't it be better to show somehow the relationship in the name? IMO it is already clear that it is not identical to a BSD license if I use a (slightly) different name, like "Simplified-BSD-3-Clause" or "BSD-3-Clause-alike". If the text is identical, one would use the predefined short names; reversely that means that if it is not a predefined short name, that it is not the identical text. Best regards Ole
