Please add more concrete license info

[anonymous]

The only position where "BSD License" is mentoined for your plugin is the setup.py. Could you please add an header with the BSD License or stating the availability under the terms of BSD License in your source files?

[Noah Kantrowitz]

The statement of license there is sufficient. Unless you have legal precedent showing me that isn't considered valid, I don't know why I would bother.

[Christoph Egger]

There are at least 2 Problems with your Answer.

First there are 2 different Versions of OSI approved BSD Licenses (First Note on ​http://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php)

Second, I can tell you that I'll be unable to get this plugin supported in Debian GNU/Linux without additional copyright information.

While I won't force you to make your plugin debian compatible I ask you at least to clarify which BSD License is used for your Software

[Noah Kantrowitz]

I think it reasonably obvious that I use the modern version of the BSD license. Granted I wouldn't be thrilled if someone used my name to advertise anything, but I think the risk of that is pretty low, don't you? My software works fine with Debian and all Debian variants as far as I know, and I use it with Ubuntu on a daily basis. Can you cite specific compatibility issues?

[Christoph Egger]

By saying «getting supported in Debian» I was thinking of having the plugin in the offical archive system (where one can install it by apt). For doing so there are strict conditions for example on license. This is set up by the so called social contract ​http://www.debian.org/social_contract

[Noah Kantrowitz]

Does that get me anything that easy_install doesn't? (which I already push support for in all my new plugins) If Debian doesn't think that a simple declaration of license isn't enough, then I suggest you revise your policies since I am not going to go update 4 dozen plugins times however many files just for that.