[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/licenses license-list.html
From: |
Bryan Robert |
Subject: |
www/licenses license-list.html |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 23:39:05 -0500 (EST) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Bryan Robert <bpr> 19/01/07 23:39:05
Modified files:
licenses : license-list.html
Log message:
Changed 'Apache-2.0' to 'Apache 2.0' in ISC entry
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/license-list.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.501&r2=1.502
Patches:
Index: license-list.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/license-list.html,v
retrieving revision 1.501
retrieving revision 1.502
diff -u -b -r1.501 -r1.502
--- license-list.html 8 Jan 2019 04:26:20 -0000 1.501
+++ license-list.html 8 Jan 2019 04:39:05 -0000 1.502
@@ -654,7 +654,7 @@
<p>This license had an unfortunate wording choice: it provided recipients with
"Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this
software…". 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 "Permission to use, copy, modify, *and/or* distribute this
software…". While the inclusion of "and/or" 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 "Permission to use, copy, modify, *and/or* distribute this
software…". While the inclusion of "and/or" 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 04:26:20 $
+$Date: 2019/01/08 04:39:05 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>