Jesse, Jesse Gibbons 写道:
1. newspeakThe author says bsd-like. I don't see any clauses or yelling. What should Iput for it? Here's the relevant snippet from debian/copyright:
This is the ‘Expat’ licence, often ambiguously called ‘MIT’.
2. KennyThe author says Artistic as found on debian in /usr/share/common- licenses/Artistic. It is not found in (guix licenses), and sincee I do not run debian from that era I cannot compare the text to verify the license'sidentity. Here's the relevant snippet from debian/copyright:
As noted on IRC: I've mirrored that file from a debian system[0]. What a mess: it's *almost* <https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Clarified_Artistic_License_1.0>, but not actually the same (e.g. points 3.e & 4.e are missing).
Considering this is what Debian calls the ‘Artistic’ licence, though, we can be almost certain that other Guix packages have the same subtle difference already.
Kind regards, T G-R [0]: https://www.tobias.gr/Debian.Artistic.txt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature