Skip Menu |
 

This queue is for tickets about the Module-Build CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 76965
Status: open
Priority: 0/
Queue: Module-Build

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: dagolden [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: Unimportant
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: (no value)



Subject: Module::Build::API license definitions should be updated to match CPAN::Meta::Spec
Download (untitled) / with headers
text/plain 176b
On IRC, SineSwiper pointed out that "restricted" is not very clear and differs from CPAN::Meta::Spec. It (and other license hints) should be updated to match CPAN::Meta::Spec.
Download (untitled) / with headers
text/plain 596b
On Thu May 03 11:06:20 2012, DAGOLDEN wrote: Show quoted text
> On IRC, SineSwiper pointed out that "restricted" is not very clear and > differs from CPAN::Meta::Spec. It (and other license hints) should be > updated to match CPAN::Meta::Spec.
The two descriptions seem pretty similar to me: From Module::Build::API: The distribution may not be redistributed without special permission from the author and/or copyright holder. From CPAN::Meta::Spec: Requires special permission from copyright holder The names themselves don't match though, it's "restrictive" vs. "restricted", is that what you mean?
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #76965] Module::Build::API license definitions should be updated to match CPAN::Meta::Spec
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 13:53:50 -0400
To: bug-Module-Build [...] rt.cpan.org
From: David Golden <dagolden [...] cpan.org>
Download (untitled) / with headers
text/plain 922b
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Ken Williams via RT <bug-Module-Build@rt.cpan.org> wrote: Show quoted text
> The two descriptions seem pretty similar to me: > > From Module::Build::API: > >   The distribution may not be redistributed without special permission > from the author and/or copyright holder. > > From CPAN::Meta::Spec: > >   Requires special permission from copyright holder
The point that came up on IRC is that there are other restrictions possible than just "redistribution" -- e.g. 'non-commercial use' restrictions. I think the point of "restrict(ive|ed)" is that it's not fully open and so we shouldn't try to qualify it or imply gradations of restrictions. The actual name harmonization can happen when CPAN::Meta::Spec v2 is eventually implemented in M::B (with backcompatibility support, of course). This is a low priority ticket -- mostly a placeholder for future work so the point doesn't get lost. -- David


This service is sponsored and maintained by Best Practical Solutions and runs on Perl.org infrastructure.

Please report any issues with rt.cpan.org to rt-cpan-admin@bestpractical.com.