On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:42 PM Jens-Ulrik Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello, > > I am trying to package¹ editline² for Fedora, > which has an unusual license that originating from cnews: > https://www.openhub.net/licenses/cnews. > > Let me quote the full license text below too for completeness. > > Can this be considered a BSD-ish or similar license? > Or does it need a new Fedora license tag (CNEWS?)? This is almost identical to what Fedora calls the revised version of the Henry Spencer Regex Library License: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/Henry_Spencer_Reg-Ex_Library_License Note this compliance-related comment: "Be sure to include a copy of the newer license terms in the package as %license, to comply with the "documentation" clauses." Apparently the Fedora license tag for either version of the Henry Spencer license has been "HSRL". SPDX uses the short identifier "Spencer-94" for what I think is essentially identical to the revised HSRL. The difference that I spotted is that this CNEWS license adds the word "freely". I believe that would cause the license text not to match Spencer-94 in the SPDX sense. That difference is far less significant than textual differences in other licenses that Fedora has mapped to the sam License: tag. Therefore, as an unsatisfying shorter term solution here I'd suggest using "HSRL". Richard > > Thank you, Jens > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1867290 > > Copyright 1992,1993 Simmule Turner and Rich Salz > All rights reserved. > > This software is not subject to any license of the American Telephone > and Telegraph Company or of the Regents of the University of California. > > Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose on > any computer system, and to alter it and redistribute it freely, subject > to the following restrictions: > 1. The authors are not responsible for the consequences of use of this > software, no matter how awful, even if they arise from flaws in it. > 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either by > explicit claim or by omission. Since few users ever read sources, > credits must appear in the documentation. > 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be > misrepresented as being the original software. Since few users > ever read sources, credits must appear in the documentation. > 4. This notice may not be removed or altered. > _______________________________________________ > legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
