What license for our packaging?

[Eddy Petrișor]

Hello,

(Note that there is a different mail that starts with a similar paragraph, so please read both).

Toady I was working on the wormux package and I had to add some packaging copyright attribution to 
the debian/copyright[0]. I started modifying the debian/copyright file to be automatically parsable, 
then I was struck by the fact that we haven't explicitly licensed the wormux packaging, so I was 
unable to do properly the modification.

So, as a team policy, I would like to propose we settle on a license that we use for packaging, by 
default[1] for all our packages.




I propose that, from now on, we use the BSD license for our packaging[2].

What do you think?




[0] I 'borrowed' MadCoder's refresh-patches mechanism from the tokyocabinet package (seen it in 
MadCoder's packaging with git presentation). I checked the license terms/incompatibilities I saw 
that packaging was BSD licensed (cool)
[1] of course, packages we take over might need special-casing for the license and might default to 
other license
[2] since I found it very useful that MadCoder used the BSD license and I was able to use the code 
without any troubles
-- 
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein