NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Obviously ... (Score:1)
If the you prefer the Perl[1234] license and the module works with Perl[1234], knock yourself out. But unless I'm using Perl 1, the Perl 1 license doesn't apply - I never used Perl[123] so I've never accepted their licenses. Haven't used Perl4 at current $DayJob so that doesn't touch *me* there, and we've I think stamped out all legacy SybPerl so we're done with that. (Did have a bit o' Perl4 for the $StartUp so there may be some modules I've dual-used on the old NT laptop with both Perl4 and Perl5.x licenses.)
The ambiguity is similar to the FSF recommended "or any later version" wording (but without the GPLv3 sneaking new varieties of IP into a copyright license).
Bill
# I had a sig when sigs were cool
use Sig;
Reply to This
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps from the practical standpoint this is true -- why would I distribute software that you can't actually use? -- but there's at least one court case active right now where one side is arguing in all seriousness that distributing software under the Artistic License means that you're not interested in protecting your copyright