BSD-LICENSE contains a license that isn't BSD

[EdwardBetts]

The BSD-LICENSE file in this repository does not contain a BSD-style licence (2-clause, 3-clause, or 4-clause). Instead, it contains a permissive licence that resembles the MIT (Expat) licence, but it omits the standard clause requiring inclusion of the copyright and permission notice in all copies or substantial portions.

This could be misleading for downstream users or packagers who expect a standard BSD licence when they see the filename.

To avoid confusion and ensure compatibility with standard licensing practices, please consider one of the following:

• If the intention is to use a BSD licence, replace the current text with a standard BSD 2-clause or 3-clause licence.

• If the intention is to use the MIT/Expat licence, then:

  • Rename the file to LICENSE or MIT-LICENSE to reflect the correct licence family, and
  • Add the missing clause requiring inclusion of the permission notice, so the package uses the standard MIT/Expat wording.

Using a standard, widely recognised licence text makes it easier for others to understand, reuse, and package the code (e.g. for inclusion in Linux distributions).

Thanks!