From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.105.134.102] (helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DiWp8-0004xy-Jz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:16:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j5FCFNNR001477; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:15:23 GMT Received: from outbound3.mail.tds.net (outbound3.mail.tds.net [216.170.230.93]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5FCDgtf024948 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:13:42 GMT Received: from cerberus.oppresses.us (h69-21-248-215.69-21.unk.tds.net [69.21.248.215]) by outbound3.mail.tds.net (8.13.4/8.12.2) with ESMTP id j5FCEU9a001490 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:14:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: by cerberus.oppresses.us (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4DC1A4ABFB; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:14:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:14:30 -0400 From: Jon Portnoy To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about licenses Message-ID: <20050615121430.GA18436@cerberus.oppresses.us> References: <87u0jzhnrh.fsf@veller.net> <42B011A2.5010700@people.pl> <20050615113908.GA17719@cerberus.oppresses.us> <42B01879.6090804@people.pl> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42B01879.6090804@people.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 3768b3b8-5c9a-423c-854a-a85127f0bf85 X-Archives-Hash: 106c13374561313cbc7a6decb60bb596 On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +0200, Krzysiek Pawlik wrote: > Jon Portnoy wrote: > >>Symlink? If MIT == MetaKit, then: > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>ln -s MIT MetaKit > > I don't know about this specific case but generally speaking licenses > > that're similar in language and intent have very small (often cosmetic) > > differences; if there is even the slightest difference it (legally) > > qualifies as a different license and probably really should be included > > separately to be safe > > Exactly my point :) I've looked at MIT and MetaKit and: > > +Copyright (c) 1996-2001 Jean-Claude Wippler > -Copyright (c) > > Except formatting and above diff theye are identical. > You're right; chances are this is a mistake on the part of whoever wrote/committed the MetaKit ebuild, it probably had a 'COPYING' file and whoever reviewed it didn't recognize the MIT license. File a bug Either way the point still stands as far as licenses in general go 8) -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list