I think it means they're goofy, and unlikely to write code compliant with even the most basic file system, security, or supportable coding practices. Some of us went through things like this with BSD licenses that required copyright notices in every file: others of us went through similar issues with Dan Bernstein's djbdns, daemontools, and qmial, which were technically fascinating but completely ignored the File System Hierarchy and turned out to be destabilizing to try to run. Frankly, if the author can't be bothered to use a tested and cautiously written license, I'd be concerned about trying to integrate anything else they wrote. What is the software in question? On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Johan Swensson <kupo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm looking into packaging a software that provides a LICENSE file which > only contains this: > > "Everyone is permitted to do anything on this program including copying, > modifying, and improving, unless you try to pretend that you wrote it. > i.e., the above copyright notice has to appear in all copies. > THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE." > > I'm trying to get upstream to clarify but in the meantime I throw out a > question here as well. > Is this a proper license we can use in Fedora? If so which license would I > put in the License: field? > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
