[aur-general] [RFC] New package: proj-svn

[Stefan Husmann]

Am 16.06.2012 18:57, schrieb Kwpolska:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Jesse Juhani Jaara
> <jesse.jaara at gmail.com> wrote:
>> As the software is Licensed under MIT license you do not have to copy
>> the COPYING file into the package. You only need to copy the COPYING
>> file if you set license=('custom: foobar'), but if the license is one of
>> the licenses included in [core]/licenses (is even in base group) package
>> license=('license_name') is enought. (GPL1/2/3, MIT, APACHE....)
>
> The original package in repos DOES install a COPYING file.  For a reason.
>
>>
>> All source, data files and other contents of the PROJ.4 package are
>> available under the following terms.  Note that the PROJ 4.3 and earlier
>> was "public domain" as is common with US government work, but apparently
>> this is not a well defined legal term in many countries.  I am placing
>> everything under the following MIT style license because I believe it is
>> effectively the same as public domain, allowing anyone to use the code as
>> they wish, including making proprietary derivatives.
>>
>> Though I have put my own name as copyright holder, I don't mean to imply
>> I did the work.  Essentially all work was done by Gerald Evenden.
>>
>>   --------------
>>
>>   Copyright (c) 2000, Frank Warmerdam
>
> You need one with BSD and MIT.  They (at least BSD does) force you to
> insert a copyright line.  And so, every package under such licenses
> has a file in /usr/share/licenses.
>
I allways do a

ls /usr/share/licenses/common/

which gives me
AGPL   Apache  Artistic2.0  CDDL  EPL  FDL1.2  GPL   GPL3  LGPL2.1  LPPL  PerlArtistic	PSF   W3C
AGPL3  APACHE  CCPL	    CPL   FDL  FDL1.3  GPL2  LGPL  LGPL3    MPL   PHP		RUBY  ZPL

if I am not sure about if a license is common in Arch's sense or not.
As you see, MIT is not common. So the license file is needed in this case.

Regards Stefan