On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 11:53:45AM -0700, John Ramsden via arch-general wrote:
It states MIT/BSD are special cases, just out of curiousity, what makes them special that they cannot be added?
I believe the reasoning for that is they include program-specific copyright information, so you can't just use a reference copy of the license in this case.
- Luke English
-- John Ramsden
On Sat, Nov 3, 2018, at 1:22 AM, Bruno Pagani via arch-general wrote:
Le 03/11/2018 à 08:46, Stephen Gregoratto via arch-general a écrit :
I'm in the process of adding a new package to the AUR, when I noticed that the MIT Licence - which this program is licensed under - is not available under /usr/share/licenses/common. Seeing that it's a fairly popular license that is copied by a number of packages (many of them Rust based: find /usr/share/licenses -name "*MIT*"), I think it would be beneficial if there could be a copy of the MIT license in the licenses package.
I've attached a diff of my edits to licenses trunk. Note that I copied the licence file from rust/LICENCE-MIT and ran updpkgsums. Also, it seems the PHP-3.0 licence has changed, and its checksum has updated as well.
Please read https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD#license
Especially the first bullet point.
Email had 1 attachment:
- signature.asc 1k (application/pgp-signature)