"Lawrence Rosen" <[email protected]> writes: >I'd count that as another reason *not* to provide plain text license >files. I think it would be FAR more useful to have a simple license >statement in the source tree of each program that points to the >OFFICIAL version of that license on the OSI website. This also avoids >the duplication of text -- with potential transcription or legal >errors -- in many source code trees, and completely avoids the need to >actually read the licenses if one trusts OSI.
We don't have a choice about whether plain text licenses are shipped in program source trees. That's going to happen. We *do* have some influence over whether those plain text versions are consistent, canonical, and correct. Therefore, etc, etc. I hope this makes my point clearer :-). -Karl _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
