Created attachment 331126 [details] tcltk license template The following licenses have identical wording, except for different copyright owner and program name: BWidget tktreectrl We normally consider such licenses as identical. I suggest that we unite them into a "tcltk" template that will cover both; see attachment. If there are no objections, I'll commit licenses/tcltk in one week from now (or earlier if I get your approval here), and update LICENSE of the following packages: dev-tcltk/bwidget dev-tcltk/tkpng dev-tcltk/tktray dev-tcltk/tktreectrl @Licenses team: the Tcl/Tk license hasn't (yet) been officially approved by the FSF, but it was discussed and rated free: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2010-07/msg00008.html> @Tcl/Tk team: dev-lang/tcl and dev-lang/tk are currently marked "BSD" which is close but not exact.
Your are the master of licenses, so please go ahead. Thanks for your work.
> Created attachment 331126 [details] > tcltk license template Committed to tree and added to MISC-FREE license group. > The following licenses have identical wording, except for different > copyright owner and program name: > > BWidget > tktreectrl Removed. > dev-tcltk/bwidget > dev-tcltk/tkpng > dev-tcltk/tktray > dev-tcltk/tktreectrl LICENSE variable updated. > @Tcl/Tk team: dev-lang/tcl and dev-lang/tk are currently marked "BSD" which > is close but not exact. Not yet done, therefore leaving this bug open.
I've updated LICENSE in dev-lang/{tcl,tk}. Closing. @Tcl/Tk team: I've noticed that many ebuilds in dev-tcltk are labelled BSD, too. Looking into a few of these packages I find that they're under the tcltk license. Maybe you can keep this in mind when next updating these packages, and update LICENSE while you're at it. I don't see it as an urgent task, though.
