Closed phst closed 4 years ago
This PR is incorrect, as it doesn't include the copyright notice, which is an integral part of the license in this case.
Either way, I'm not a fan of having the license stored twice, and moving it to an external file would require changing the MELPA recipe to include the license, as including the license text is necessary for third parties to be able to redistribute.
If easy identification is desired, I'd much rather just add an SDPX license identifier to the package headers.
This makes it easier for humans and tooling to identify the license of the code.