Talk:Zlib License

Latest comment: 16 years ago by Stemonitis in topic Requested move

rename the article edit

Any objections to renaming the article to "Licence of zlib/libpng"?

This would avoid needing the ugly and unnecessary "technical restrictions" note at the top. Gronky 12:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

do it. 208.103.185.72 15:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I object (post facto). “zlib/libpng license” is the recognised name of the license, “ Licence of zlib/libpng” is not. -Ahruman 16:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Reply
I couldn't find anywhere either the gzip or png projects used the term "zlib/libpng licence", so it seems to be a purely descriptive term (rather than a term of art). In which case either construction is fine. The new one just avoids a technical problem in Wikipedia. Gronky 01:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Requested move edit

The current title is awkward and not particularly efficient; in addition, most free software licence articles use the US spelling for the page title ("license"). For consistency and clarity the page should be moved to the alternative title. Chris Cunningham 15:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Maybe "zlib License" would a better title than "zlib license", since that is what the site itself calls the license; in actual use, however, the capitalization is varied. Either way, I agree that the grammatical restructuring of this article's title is less awkward, and much closer to the common name. "License" should be used because that is what the license is called. GracenotesT § 15:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

This article has been renamed from Licence of zlib/libpng to zlib License as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 17:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

zlib without the /libpng suffix is simpler, more common, and more likely to be found in search.