document/TranslateProject
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject.git synced 2025-01-25 23:11:02 +08:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update 20160921 lawyer The MIT License, Line by Line.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Amanda0212 2019-03-02 16:22:37 +08:00 committed by GitHub
parent 14a4d28992
commit f8b12f319b
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
sources/talk/20160921 lawyer The MIT License, Line by Line.md
View File

@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ Here we go:
“麻省理工许可证”并不是一个单一的许可证，而是包含来自于麻省理工学院为发布而准备的语言的一系列许可证表格。这些年来，无论是对于使用它的原始项目都经历了许多变化，还是作为其他项目的模型。fedora项目保持了一种[mit许可证陈列室的种类][2]，在简单文本中保留了微小的变化，如甲醛中的解剖标本，追踪着一种没有规律的进化。
Fortunately, the [Open Source Initiative][3] and [Software Package Data eXchange][4] groups have standardized a generic MIT-style license form as “The MIT License”. OSI in turn has adopted SPDX’ standardized [string identifiers][5] for common open-source licenses, with `MIT` pointing unambiguously to the standardized form “MIT License”. If you want MIT-style terms for a new project, use [the standardized form][1].
幸运的是，[开源计划][3]和[数据交换软件包][4]组已经将通用的MIT式许可证表格标准化为“mit许可证”。而OSI则将SPDX的标准化（字符串标识符）[5]用于普通的开源许可证，“MIT”明确指向标准化的表格“MIT许可证”。
幸运的是，[开源计划][3]和[数据交换软件包][4]组已经将通用的MIT式许可证表格标准化为“mit许可证”。而OSI则将SPDX的标准化[字符串识别符][5]用于普通的开源许可证，“MIT”明确指向标准化的表格“MIT许可证”。
Even if you include “The MIT License” or “SPDX:MIT” in a `LICENSE` file, any responsible reviewer will still run a comparison of the text against the standard form, just to be sure. While various license forms calling themselves “MIT License” vary only in minor details, the looseness of what counts as an “MIT License” has tempted some authors into adding bothersome “customizations”. The canonical horrible, no good, very bad example of this is [the JSON license][6], an MIT-family license plus “The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil.”. This kind of thing might be “very Crockford”. It is definitely a pain in the ass. Maybe the joke was supposed to be on the lawyers. But they laughed all the way to the bank.
即使在“许可证”文件中包含“MIT许可证”或“SPDX：MIT”，负责任的评论者为了确定仍然会对文本和标准表单进行比较。尽管各种自称为“麻省理工许可证”的许可证表格只在细节上有所不同，但所谓的“麻省理工许可证”的宽松已经诱使一些作者添加了令人讨厌的“定制”。典型的可怕的的例子就是[JSON许可证][6]，一个MIT-family许可证加上“软件应该用于正途的，而不是邪恶的...”这种事情可能是“非常克罗克福德”。这绝对是一个痛苦的事情。可能是律师们开的一个玩笑，但他们一路笑到最后。