On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 5:23 AM, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:36:08AM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote: >> On Thursday 30 October 2008, David Cantrell wrote: >> > That's the bit where I suggest instead of saying, eg, "frobnitz" to mean >> > "the Frobnitz licence" you say "frobnitz" to mean "the licence whose text >> > is in the 'frobnitz' file". That would allow the author to use any licence >> > he wants. >> This seems like the road to chaos. Imagine I put "mit" there and mit.txt >> contains the text of the GPLv3. I think we should have unique identifiers for >> every licence, and expand them to encompass more licences if necessary, then >> allow such inconsistent behaviour. > > If you say 'mit' and don't have a 'mit' file that should be an error in > my scheme. mit.txt != mit. > > If you're silly enough to put the text of the GPL3 in a file called > 'mit.txt' then that's your problem. No such scheme can protect against > user error. Your hypothetical is no different from you putting 'mit' in > the current 'license' field while saying in the POD "blah blah blah GPL3 > blah blah".
Instead of including a COPY of the license in every distro, how about putting the URL into the META.yml file? (Or is it URI? I always get that mixed up.) This seems like the sort of thing that URL or URI or whichever it is would be perfect for.
