Question on Dual-Licensing Some Code for Phobos

[Walter Bright]

On 11/30/2017 11:17 AM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> I'm starting work on a proposal for stdx.decimal, and one of the clearest 
> implementations to work off of is the Python implementation.
> 
> This however, poses a problem because Python's source is under the PSFL, a 
> BSD-like permissive license. Any derivative work, such as a D conversion, must 
> have the original copyright notice, a copy of the PSFL, as a well as a summary 
> of changes. This is simple enough to do, but the resulting code would be 
> dual-licensed with the PSFL and the BSL 1.0 (dual-licensing being relatively 
> common in other OSS projects).
> 
> My question is there any reason this could pose a problem? Could this interfere 
> with something like distribution or company adoption?
> 
> Also note, one of the existing Phobos modules, std.net.isemail, is supposed to 
> be dual-licensed because it's derived from an existing BSD work. But, it's 
> missing the BSD license from the top (and is technically breaking the license 
> because of that).

I checked, and the Phobos module is clearly in violation of the license in
https://github.com/dominicsayers/isemail/blob/master/is_email.php

This needs to be fixed immediately.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18023