On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:50 AM, David Golden wrote:
17. Better formalization of license field
Proposal:
Replace the list of strings for the "license" field with something
extensible and unambiguous. (RicardoSignes)
+1
From the perspective of search.cpan I would like to see it have two
properties
1) a name 2) a URL. perhaps for a list of specified names the URL
could be omitted
but I do not think we should restrict what should be in the license
field
* When it comes to extensible and unambiguous identifiers, all roads
eventually lead to URLs... (AdamKennedy);
yes
* Right now, the only dual license you can specify is "perl". What if
someone wants a dual Artistic 2/GPL 3 license? The current spec
says this
can only be a string; why not an array? [[User:elliot|Elliot Shank]]
+1
* Licences can differ per-file - eg, code might be covered by
Artistic1/GPL2, and doco by something CCish. Or some code might be
Artistic1/GPL2 but one file borrowed from another project might be
GPL2+.
For plenty of distributions, a single entry (whether it be a string
or an
array) is misleading. [[User:DrHyde|David Cantrell]]
maybe some way of indicating that the distribution is of mixed
licenses and
then listing all the licenses it is a mixture of.
Graham.
