[arch-general] Add MIT Licence to /usr/share/licences/common

[Luke English]

On Sun, Nov 04, 2018 at 01:21:28AM +0100, mpan wrote:
> 
> >>> It states MIT/BSD are special cases, just out of curiousity, what makes them special that they cannot be added?  
> >>   Because there is no MIT or 1/2/3-clause BSD license. There are
> >> hundreds of independent, barely related licenses that are quite similar
> >> and, therefore, are considered together as a class of MIT licens*es*
> >> (note the plural), 1/2/3-clause BSD licens*es* etc. Despite many of them
> >> may be very similar and, in fact, usually they share huge portion of the
> >> text, they are formally different agreements.
> >>
> >>   In the above explanation I do not support any of the sides. Whether
> >> classes that share 100% of important content and 99% of formatting
> >> content, should be considered similar enough to have a shared entry in
> >> Arch’s licenses directory, is a separate decision. I am just explaining.
> > 
> > It has nothing to do with any of that. It's simply that those licenses have
> > project-specific copyright information added to them and cannot be generic.
>   Approximately the same as what I’ve just said, but less
> verbose/precise. :)
> 
You didn't mention the word copyright once, you just managed to confuse
people, myself included. Orwell said "never use a long word where a
short one will do", and this question has already been answered multiple
times. Can we close the thread now?

- L



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20181104/12a3101d/attachment-0001.asc>