On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 13:52 +0400, Anton Martchukov wrote: > 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright > notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. > > 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must > not claim that you wrote the original software. If you use this > software in a product, an acknowledgment in the product > documentation would be appreciated but is not required. > > 3. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must > not be misrepresented as being the original software. > > 4. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote > products derived from this software without specific prior written > permission. [...] > this is BSD-4-clause license as per SPDX [1], however license check > incorrectly detects it as BSD-3-clause [2] : [...] > [1] http://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-4-Clause
Actually, afaict it's missing a clause which makes it four-clause BSD, and which is even listed on the SPDX page you linked to: 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the <organization>. Since that term is the one which differs between the three- and four-clause variants of the license, it needs to be included in order for licensecheck to detect it as a four-clause license. I'll leave the bug open for now in case one of my co-maintainers disagrees, but I'm not actually convinced that the license above really even qualifies as 3-BSD + extra stuff, given that it omits: Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. and the second clause in the text you quoted doesn't appear to equate to that. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
