[arch-dev-public] [signoff] licenses 2.7-1
snowmaniscool at gmail.com
Thu Mar 17 18:07:11 EDT 2011
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Added Perl Artistic 2.0 (https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/21167),
>>> dropped RALINK as it isn't in use anymore.
>> Is there any reason why the Perl Artistic 2.0 license is installed in
>> a Artistic2.0 directory? Wouldn't it be more logical to have it in a
>> PerlArtistic2.0 directory as we already have a PerlArtistic directory
>> containing version 1 of the license?
>> In case this is just nit picking, then consider this my signoff (on x86_64).
> 1) no one calls it "The Perl Artistic License"; it is just "The
> Artistic License", look at the top of the file
> 2) Every package using it already in some form just calls it Artistic
> or Artistic 2.0 or something
OK, makes sense. You can move it to core unless you want another signoff.
More information about the arch-dev-public