www/licenses license-list.html

[Therese Godefroy]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Therese Godefroy <th_g> 19/01/08 04:19:19

Modified files:
        licenses       : license-list.html 

Log message:
        Fix quotes and emphasis.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/license-list.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.502&r2=1.503

Patches:
Index: license-list.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/licenses/license-list.html,v
retrieving revision 1.502
retrieving revision 1.503
diff -u -b -r1.502 -r1.503
--- license-list.html   8 Jan 2019 04:39:05 -0000       1.502
+++ license-list.html   8 Jan 2019 09:19:15 -0000       1.503
@@ -652,9 +652,9 @@
 <dd>
 <p>This license is sometimes also known as the OpenBSD License. It is a free 
software license, and compatible with the GNU GPL.</p>
 
-<p>This license had an unfortunate wording choice: it provided recipients with 
&quot;Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this 
software&hellip;&quot;. This was the same language from the license of Pine 
that the University of Washington later claimed prohibited people from 
distributing modified versions of the software.</p>
+<p>This license had an unfortunate wording choice: it provided recipients with 
&ldquo;Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this 
software&hellip;&rdquo; This was the same language from the license of Pine 
that the University of Washington later claimed prohibited people from 
distributing modified versions of the software.</p>
 
-<p>ISC has told us they do not share the University of Washington's 
interpretation, and we have every reason to believe them. ISC also updated the 
license to read &quot;Permission to use, copy, modify, *and/or* distribute this 
software&hellip;&quot;. While the inclusion of &quot;and/or&quot; doesn't 
completely solve the issue, there's no reason to avoid software released under 
this license. However, to help make sure this language cannot cause any trouble 
in the future, we encourage developers to choose a different license for their 
own works. The <a href="#FreeBSD">FreeBSD License</a> is similarly permissive 
and brief. However, if you want a lax, weak license, we recommend using the 
Apache 2.0 license.</p></dd>
+<p>ISC has told us they do not share the University of Washington's 
interpretation, and we have every reason to believe them. ISC also updated the 
license to read &ldquo;Permission to use, copy, modify, <strong>and/or</strong> 
distribute this software&hellip;&rdquo; While the inclusion of 
&ldquo;and/or&rdquo; doesn't completely solve the issue, there's no reason to 
avoid software released under this license. However, to help make sure this 
language cannot cause any trouble in the future, we encourage developers to 
choose a different license for their own works. The <a href="#FreeBSD">FreeBSD 
License</a> is similarly permissive and brief. However, if you want a lax, weak 
license, we recommend using the Apache 2.0 license.</p></dd>
 
 <dt><a id="MPL-2.0"
        href="http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:MPLv2.0";>Mozilla Public
@@ -2767,7 +2767,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2019/01/08 04:39:05 $
+$Date: 2019/01/08 09:19:15 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>