From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Allan Webber Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] licenses: Add beerware license. Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 09:00:38 -0700 Message-ID: <87y4923849.fsf@dustycloud.org> References: <83dc458a779ea4c3d3c9a08d5d5a4a8420e98b31.1459033650.git.leo@famulari.name> <871t6w3czm.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160327100811.51d01807@debian-netbook> <874mbry6r0.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20160327213155.GA29056@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55120) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akZau-0006uA-VJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:00:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akZat-0001ld-Q9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:00:44 -0400 Received: from dustycloud.org ([2600:3c02::f03c:91ff:feae:cb51]:59016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akZat-0001kL-Gf for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2016 12:00:43 -0400 In-reply-to: <20160327213155.GA29056@jasmine> 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 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?