How should ports refer to the 2-clause BSD license?

[Ryan Schmidt]

> On Dec 4, 2016, at 6:25 PM, Lawrence Velázquez <larryv at macports.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Dec 4, 2016, at 12:11 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Dec 4, 2016, at 10:49, Lawrence Velázquez <larryv at macports.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The checking script only mentions BSD (3-clause) and BSD-old
>>> (4-clause).
>> 
>> As far as I was aware, we were referring to all three versions of the
>> BSD licensee as "BSD". Is there a reason to do otherwise?
> 
> At a minimum, the 4-clause license must be distinguished as "BSD-old"
> because it is not compatible with the GPL.

Oh right. That's what we do. I remember now.

> If we've already been referring to the 2-clause license as "BSD", it's
> probably fine (from a practical standpoint) to continue doing so,
> although the ambiguity doesn't sit well with me.

IMHO it's dumb that they don't assign version numbers to their license versions.