tajmone
commented
1 year ago Is this information accurate, or does it need to be updated to reflect the more permissive nature of the BSD 2-Clause license?
The BSD-2 License prevails, the book was never updated in this respect.
I had intended to add a footnote to the book about this, but the project has become stale due to some changes which are still waiting for the author's approval. At some point I should really just roll back those changes, so that I can freeze the contents and at least maintain the dependencies of this project and other tasks unrelated to its contents, so the project can move on from its current stall.
I've noticed something that confused me; on the IF Wiki, Hugo (the system) is listed as having a BSD 2-Clause license:
https://www.ifwiki.org/Hugo
However, the book lists Hugo, the standard library, and its various tools as being under a far more restrictive set of terms.
"Hugo is copyrighted by its Author. Programs created using the Hugo Compiler are the property of the individual user who created them. The use of the Hugo library files (the “Hugo Library”) and the distribution of the Hugo Engine are authorized for the creation of non-commercial or shareware-based software. The use of the Hugo Library is allowed in commercial software, although copyright of the library files themselves remains with the Author. Commercial distribution of the Hugo Compiler, the Hugo Engine, and/or the Hugo Debugger may be allowed by arrangement with the Author. The source code for the Hugo Compiler, the Hugo Engine, and the Hugo Debugger (the “Hugo Source Code”) is available for porting to new platforms. Public distribution of modified versions of the Hugo Source Code is not permitted."
Is this information accurate, or does it need to be updated to reflect the more permissive nature of the BSD 2-Clause license?