Agree... Think the same. The name explains itself. Public Domain should be public.
- °v° Marcelo Cavalcante Rocha / Kalib - /(_)\ Usuário Linux #407564 / Usuário Asterisk #1148 - ^ ^ GNU-Linux - Livre, Poderoso e Seguro - TUX-CE Member - www.tux-ce.org - Archlinux-br Developer Team - http://archlinux-br.org - http://www.marcelocavalcante.net
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Paulo Matias firstname.lastname@example.org:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Daenyth Blank<email@example.com%2Barch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 13:02, Hugo Doriahugodoria@gmail.com wrote:
I am with Allan here. +1 for 'custom'.
I'd not agree here. Isn't public domain exactly the absence of a license? When something is public domain you have no obligations at all. Even citing the author's name isn't required. You can do what you want with a public domain work.
So I can't see why should we require to ship a different public domain declaration for each public domain package. I think something like 'none' or 'PD' without the obligation to install anything to /usr/share/licenses would be the best way to go here.