Re: license question

[Brook Milligan <brook%nmsu.edu@localhost>]

> On Jul 14, 2017, at 6:48 PM, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> 
> The usual response is:
> 
>  Has this license been determined to be Free Software by FSF, or Open
>  Source by OSI?  If not, have you asked upstream to have it approved or
>  use an approved license?
> 
>  Regardless, if this license is not in pkgsrc/licenses already, even if
>  neither authority has blessed it, you are free to add it as
>  licenses/flashpix-license (with -license meaning it has not been
>  approved by a pkgsrc-recognized authority).

The implication is that if a license is approved, then it should not have the -license suffix, right?

If so, why is the Boost license in licenses/boost-license and not licenses/boost?

It is approved by OSI [1].

Cheers,
Brook

[1] https://opensource.org/licenses/BSL-1.0