Distinguish license text versus license grant

[bignose-debian]

The text that grants license in the work, is not itself the legal conditions of the license.

The full text of the license conditions should be in one file, identical to other copies of the same license text (to allow easy automated matching of specific license texts).

The text that says in effect “I am the copyright holder and I grant you these permissions” should be in a separate document, with a reference to the (longer) license text.

[bignose-debian]

I have a proposed implementation of this change at the ‘wip/maintenance/license-grant’ branch in my personal fork of this repo.

[mgilson]

Hey Ben, thanks for pointing this out. I'm not an expert on licensing at all but I looked at your changes and they seem fine to me. If you want to submit a pull request, I'll happily merge it. If it's better, I can just copy/paste your changes over. I'm OK with that too.

[bignose-debian]

On 06-May-2017, Matt Gilson wrote: Hey Ben, thanks for pointing this out. I'm not an expert on licensing at all but I looked at your changes and they seem fine to me.

Great, thank you for looking over the proposed change.

If you want to submit a pull request, I'll happily merge it. If it's better, I can just copy/paste your changes over. I'm OK with that too.

You can do that. Or you can just ‘git merge’ from the repository I pointed to; that will get the individual commits, if you want to tweak them.

…

-- \ “When I was a baby I kept a diary. Recently I was re-reading | `\ it, it said ‘Day 1: Still tired from the move. Day 2: Everybody | _o__) talks to me like I'm an idiot.’” —Steven Wright | Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>

[mgilson]

So, I've looked into this a little bit more. Apache 2.0 is annoying because there are so many words :-). I've decided to change it to MIT because it's simpler.

Let me know if that's a problem for you :-).

[bignose-debian]

On 06-May-2017, Matt Gilson wrote: So, I've looked into this a little bit more. Apache 2.0 is annoying because there are so many words :-).

Oh, I hope you're not serious? Those words are necessary for what the license does. It is for good reason that the Python Software Foundation requires contributions be under the Apache License v2. One reason is that the license protects recipients against hostile patent suits. So your choice of Apache License v2 is a good one.

…

-- \ “Spam will be a thing of the past in two years' time.” —Bill | `\ Gates, 2004-01-24 | _o__) | Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>