From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Vong Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add beerware license. Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 04:07:30 +0800 Message-ID: <87egaubc3h.fsf@gmail.com> References: <83dc458a779ea4c3d3c9a08d5d5a4a8420e98b31.1459033650.git.leo@famulari.name> <871t6w3czm.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160327100811.51d01807@debian-netbook> <874mbry6r0.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160327213155.GA29056@jasmine> <87y4923849.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160328161832.GB7959@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akdRt-0000fJ-1p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:07:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akdRn-0003fS-Ge for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:07:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-x241.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::241]:36241) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akdRn-0003f2-AH for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 16:07:35 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-x241.google.com with SMTP id 1so16729466pal.3 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 13:07:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160328161832.GB7959@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:18:32 -0400") 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: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari writes: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 09:00:38AM -0700, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: >> Leo Famulari writes: >> >> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 02:02:11PM -0700, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: >> >> Efraim Flashner writes: >> >> >> >> > On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 18:50:53 -0700 >> >> > Christopher Allan Webber wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Leo Famulari writes: >> >> >> >> >> >> [...] >> >> >> >> >> >> Now there's a license name bound to cause some confusion! >> >> >> >> >> >> It looks free... I think it would be okay to push. But maybe if only >> >> >> one or two packages use it it would be better to just use the >> >> >> non-copyleft license option? >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > I went and doublechecked the license, because I've heard in the past it's not >> >> > actually a copyleft license. According to wikipedia[0], it is not copyleft, >> >> > but is GPL compatable, and recognized by the FSF. The language of the license >> >> > does allow for not buying the author a beer. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beerware >> >> >> >> It's not a copyleft license, right. That's why I suggested non-copyleft >> >> :) >> >> >> >> For example, in unzip: >> >> >> >> (license (license:non-copyleft "file://LICENSE" >> >> "See LICENSE in the distribution.")) >> > >> > I'll do whatever the consensus says. >> >> Okay, and again, I don't have strong opinions, just a suggestion. >> >> > But what about the IBM license on the base64 component of signify? What >> > should I do about that? >> >> I don't know, could you point to what the code is and the license? > > The issue is described in the cover letter: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-03/msg01097.html For your reference, Debian maintainer calls this "IBM license". [0] I would call it a non-copyleft license with patent grant. [0]: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/s/signify-openbsd/signify-openbsd_13-1_copyright