BSD 2-Clause license

[Fernando Nasser]

Hi,

Would it be possible to add:

BSD 2-clause

to our table of valid licenses?

It is already in https://spdx.org/licenses/

BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License 
https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html 	|BSD-2-Clause|

and is OSI-approved.

For reference: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html#licenseText

Thanks in advance!

P.S.: It is used by something called 'fluentd'.

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Fernando Nasser  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would it be possible to add:
>
> BSD 2-clause
>
> to our table of valid licenses?

This is already accepted under the "BSD" moniker for Fedora license tags.

[Fernando Nasser]

On 2018-02-19 11:25 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Fernando Nasser  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Would it be possible to add:
> >
> > BSD 2-clause
> >
> > to our table of valid licenses?
>
> This is already accepted under the "BSD" moniker for Fedora license tags.

Oh, I see it now:

BSD License (two clause)    BSD (...)   
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD#2ClauseBSD

Aren't we using this plain "BSD" abbreviation too liberally?

If you look at SPDX you'll see that there are BSD licenses and then BSD 
licenses, some are ok for FSF, some for OSI, some for both, and some for 
none (which is scary) (ref.: https://spdx.org/licenses/ ).

We want to get closer to the SPDX maybe it is time to use the more 
specific abbreviations for these BSD licenses we have.

P.S.: Any interest in adding a SPDX abbrev column to our table?  I can 
try and help populating it.

--Fernando

[Haïkel]

2018-02-21 16:07 GMT+01:00 Fernando Nasser :
> On 2018-02-19 11:25 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Fernando Nasser 
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Would it be possible to add:
>
> BSD 2-clause
>
> to our table of valid licenses?
>
> This is already accepted under the "BSD" moniker for Fedora license tags.
>
> Oh, I see it now:
>
> BSD License (two clause)    BSD   (...)
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD#2ClauseBSD
>
> Aren't we using this plain "BSD" abbreviation too liberally?
>
> If you look at SPDX you'll see that there are BSD licenses and then BSD
> licenses, some are ok for FSF, some for OSI, some for both, and some for
> none (which is scary) (ref.: https://spdx.org/licenses/ ).
>
> We want to get closer to the SPDX maybe it is time to use the more specific
> abbreviations for these BSD licenses we have.
>
> P.S.: Any interest in adding a SPDX abbrev column to our table?  I can try
> and help populating it.
>
> --Fernando

This discussion was raised few years ago and stalled. I don't think
it's useful to have a SPDX
abbrev column. It'd be more interesting to switch to SPDX (or refine
our own abbreviations).

Regards,
H.
> legal mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

[Fernando Nasser]

Hi, I am re-starting this request because I clouded the discussion with 
the mention of a SPDX column...

Would it be possible to add: BSD 2-clause to our table of valid licenses?
It is already in https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" 
License https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html 
https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html%3E|BSD-2-Clause| and is 
OSI-approved.
For reference: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html#licenseText
I was pointed out that we already have this as just "BSD" : BSD License 
(two clause)    BSD (...) 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD#2ClauseBSD But some are 
afraid of dropping the "2-Clause" details. Thanks in advance!  P.S.: It 
is used by something called 'fluentd'.

[Tom Callaway]

We do not currently treat the large number of BSD variants as unique
licenses, which is a key difference between Fedora and SPDX.

While I am open to considering revisiting this policy, for now, just use
"BSD" in the package spec, and include a comment next to it if you are
concerned.

~tom

[Fernando Nasser]

On 2018-02-26 3:14 PM, Tom Callaway wrote:
> We do not currently treat the large number of BSD variants as unique
> licenses, which is a key difference between Fedora and SPDX.
>
> While I am open to considering revisiting this policy, for now, just use
> "BSD" in the package spec, and include a comment next to it if you are
> concerned.

Thanks for the prompt response.

Will tell the packagers.

Cheers,
Fernando
> ~tom