Development of Perl's Module::Build ()

Gabor Szabo | 27 Mar 2010 12:45

Re: Adding both mozilla1.0 and mozilla1.1 to the list of licenses

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 2:40 PM, David Golden <xdaveg <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Gabor Szabo <szabgab <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am now trying to get Bugzilla packaged to CPAN and it is explicitely licensed
>> under mozilla1.1
>>
>> Would it be possible to add those two keys to the valid list of values
>> of the license field?
>> Software::License http://search.cpan.org/dist/Software-License/
>> already has them separated.
>
> Hi, Gabor.  Just list it as "mozilla" or "open_source" for now.  The
> way licenses get handled will be revised when we release the CPAN Meta
> 2.0 spec later this year.  (And both Mozilla licenses are already
> included separately in the valid list in the draft 2.0 spec).

That's what I did but I expect some arguments from the core Bugzilla developers
and their lawyers. I'll use your point if needed.  Thanks

Gabor

headers

David Golden | 27 Mar 2010 12:54

Re: Adding both mozilla1.0 and mozilla1.1 to the list of licenses

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Gabor Szabo <szabgab <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> That's what I did but I expect some arguments from the core Bugzilla developers
> and their lawyers. I'll use your point if needed.  Thanks

The license field in Module::Build just sets the same field in
META.yml.  If they don't like 'mozilla' (generic) set it to
'open_source', which is the option for "META.yml spec doesn't support
what I really want to put here".  You still must document the actual
license terms in the code you release.

-- David