svn commit: r421549 - in head: . Mk

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 06:29:33PM +1000, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
> On 9/09/2016 4:26 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > In both case that means there is NO license and then we should not
> > distribute them at all.
> 
> There are cases where software has no license, the author says so, but
> they mean, and/or say 'free to do with what you please'. This is neither
> NONE, nor undefined (in terms of the 'terms'), nor PD, nor
> 'empty(LICENSE)'.

That's why I prefer something along UNCLEAR/MOOT/VAGUE/CONTROVERSIAL/etc.
to cover all those "weird" cases and be done with it.

./danfe