From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: [PATCH]: gnu: Add arpack-ng. Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:03:14 +0100 Message-ID: <20150218200314.GA14130@debian> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOAqE-0002qa-88 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:03:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOAq7-0004S6-AP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:03:26 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.24]:60207) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOAq7-0004Rp-27 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:03:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: Guix-devel On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 04:10:04PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > * gnu/packages/maths.scm (arpack-ng): New variable. Looks good and compiles, please push. > + (license (license:bsd-style "file://COPYING" > + "See COPYING in the distribution.")))) Concerning bsd licenses, I am always a bit confused. This is exactly bsd-3, except that in the last clause, "name of the author" has been replaced by "name of the copyright holders nor the names of its contributors". Do we reserve bsd-3 to the exact bsd as at http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:BSD_3Clause ? Or is this sufficiently close to be called bsd-3? Andreas