Re-reading the SPDX matching guidelines, one sentence I had been completely
overlooking seems to address some of the concerns I've had about
BSD-3-Clause-variant licenses: "T he text indicated as such can be replaced
with similar values (e.g., a different name or generic term; different date)
Richard Fontana:
> The way I read the matching guidelines this license does not actually match
> to BSD-3-Clause, even though it obviously should. I think the problem is
> that I am reading the matching guidelines more literally than they may be
> intended to be read, but given that this is
The way I read the matching guidelines this license does not actually match to
BSD-3-Clause, even though it obviously should. I think the problem is that I am
reading the matching guidelines more literally than they may be intended to be
read, but given that this is supposed to be a formal
