On 12/17/2015 02:46 PM, J Lovejoy wrote:

On Dec 17, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Rob Landley <rob@...> wrote:

On 12/17/2015 12:38 PM, J Lovejoy wrote:

That sounds like a reasonable result, all things considered.

I don't care what OSI does.

I’ll add a note to the Notes field of Zero Clause BSD License
to the same effect on the upcoming release of the SPDX License List.

Please don't. Pretty please?

Hi Rob,

What I had in mind was: where it says “Note” on this page
http://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html, to add something along
the lines of capturing the following facts:

It's not the wording. It's acknowledging their mistake's existence.

"There is a license that the OSI approved after this license was added
to the SPDX License List and which is identical to this license, but
referred to there as "Free Public License 1.0.0”. Apart from the name,
the only difference is that the Free Public License is used without a
copyright notice, whereas the Zero Clause BSD License has generally
been used with a copyright notice. This difference, as per the SPDX
License List Matching Guidelines, is inconsequential for matching

purposes."

By adding some info, we avoid someone later asking why there are there
are different names for essentially the same license on SPDX and OSI.

And by adding that info, I get those questions, so I need to update my
license.html page to preemptively explain about OSI. I was hoping not to
open that can of worms.

Could you maybe wait for somebody to ask about it first? I honestly
don't believe anyone reads OSI's licensing page anymore. I do expect
them to read SPDX's.

Please feel free to edit, if you have better wording in mind.

It's not the wording. You have the right to put whatever you want on
your web page, just like OSI can say what it likes on their page. But if
you validate what OSI says, it makes me need to set the record straight
on _my_ page, and I was really trying not to go there.

If you must you must, you have your own policies to follow. I'm just not
looking forward to it.

Rob

P.S. Any course of action you can shoot down by linking to an XKCD strip
is probably not a good idea, and in this case it's http://xkcd.com/386.
Unfortunately, http://www.schlockmercenary.com/2006-07-13 also applies.
I'm going to back away from this thread again, I no longer believe I'm
helping here.