LICENSE questions

[Doug Barton]

On 06/14/10 09:59, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Hi--
>
> On Jun 14, 2010, at 1:07 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> I'm working on adding LICENSE information to my ports, and have a
>> few questions. A lot of my ports are ISC products, and they have
>> the following: http://people.freebsd.org/~dougb/COPYRIGHT.txt
>
> Yes, that's the ISC license,
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/isc-license.txt.

Right-O, so can we/I add that to ports/Mk/bsd.license*?

>> I also have dns/fpdns which has this:
>> http://people.freebsd.org/~dougb/LICENSE.txt which looks like it
>> could be BSD, but I'm not sure. I also have several others in this
>> category.
>
> That's a 3-clause BSD license variant.

Yeah, I guess I didn't ask my question properly. :)  Can I use just 
"BSD" for the license in these cases, or is there a need for us to 
differentiate between this BSD license and the now-standard 2-clause 
version?

>> net-mgmt/p5-Net-IP has http://people.freebsd.org/~dougb/COPYING.txt
>> which could fall into the "perl" category, except there isn't one.
>> :)
>
> Many Perl things are licensed under the same terms as Perl itself;
> ie, dual-licensed under the GPL&  Artistic license.  (The latter
> license is not well-written, and should be deprecated-- the GPL does
> a better job.)

My vote would be that we add a "PERL" category, but maybe there is a 
reason not to do this?

>> x11/xscreensaver doesn't have an explicit copyright/license file,
>> but it has this in the individual files: * xscreensaver, Copyright
>> (c) 1991-2010 Jamie Zawinski<jwz at jwz.org> * * Permission to use,
>> copy, modify, distribute, and sell this software and its *
>> documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
>> provided that * the above copyright notice appear in all copies and
>> that both that * copyright notice and this permission notice appear
>> in supporting * documentation.  No representations are made about
>> the suitability of this * software for any purpose.  It is provided
>> "as is" without express or * implied warranty. */ Seems like BSD to
>> me?
>
> That's a MIT/X11 license minus the all-caps DISCLAIMER.

Oy, ok, so how do I classify it? Or am I correct in assuming we do not 
yet have a category for it?

In any case, thanks for all the answers, very helpful!


Doug

-- 

	... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
			-- Propellerheads

	Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
	a domain name makeover!    http://SupersetSolutions.com/