On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:17 AM, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, in summary, here's my objections to the > current 'license' field in META.yml: > > * poorly documented; > * limited range of options for licences; > * only one licence per distribution > > The first is fixable so I'm not too bothered by it. The second and third > are fundamental design flaws which make it unfit for purpose.
Your proposal doesn't seem to address the second point in any way. I'm also not thrilled with how it addresses the third, since it seems to me that any distribution with such complex licensing terms probably can't be covered by such a mechanism anyway. For instance, if I have A.pm under GPL and B.pm under BSD, what happens when they call each other? Does that constitute encapsulation and/or usage as a library? Such matters generally have to be spelled out explicitly. I agree that the second point is a problem. I'd like to solve it by delegating to Software::License. Anything it knows about should be a valid choice. -Ken
