Explicitly use 3-Clause-BSD license text.

[johnsonjh]

Examining the COPYING file, it states the supdup programs originally derived from the BSD telnet code.

That code was relicensed 4-Clause-BSD in 1990, and relicensed 3-Clause-BSD in 1999, which would allow us to explicitly use the 3-Clause-BSD license (which would be the license already in use implicitly, per the COPYING file).

[larsbrinkhoff]

I feel this is a tricky lawyer-y question. @dabridgham should have a say, and per COPYING it seems like a BSD license might fit the bill. But then there are also numerous contributors that have added bits and pieces over the years. Maybe let sleeping bears lie?

[johnsonjh]

One good reason for a license clarification would be to allow for inclusion in Linux distributions that have specific allowable licenses, e.g. Debian or Fedora.

[dabridgham]

For myself, I have no problem with the BSD license and would have happily used it when I first wrote the code if it had existed. I can't speak to the legal question of changing the license now or to all the unnamed people who've added to the code over the years.

[ams]

What we could do is make a list of people and once in a while contact some and see what they think. If we can figure out a majority of the contributors, then it would be fine to just slap a clear license on this all.

[johnsonjh]

git-authors reports:

Simon Tatham <anakin@pobox.com>
Björn Victor <bjorn@victor.se>
Lars Brinkhoff <lars@nocrew.org>
Jeffrey H. Johnson <trnsz@pobox.com>
Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org>
Elias Martenson <lokedhs@gmail.com>
David Bridgham <dab@froghouse.org>
Ken Harrenstien <anonymous>
Leigh Klotz <klotz@quixey.com>
Richard Mlynarik <Mly@POBox.COM>
Wojciech Gac <wojciech.s.gac@gmail.com>

grepping reports:

dab@froghouse.org
wesommer@athena.mit.edu
klh@panix.com
Wojciech Gac
Mly
Klotz
Bjorn Victor

Someone would need to look further, this was just a 1-second check.

[ams]

I suspect that is good enough, and now just figure out who would be fine with 3-BSD clause. And maybe see if there are 'minor contributions' that can be ignored.