Redo the index page (flesh it out about halfway), and a couple tweaks to

the license page.

1 files changed, 11 insertions, 9 deletions

diff --git a/www/license.html b/www/license.html
index c178a96d..547adeab 100644
--- a/www/license.html
+++ b/www/license.html
@@ -3,9 +3,10 @@
 <h2>Toybox is licensed under the terms of GPLv2.</h2>
 
 <p>The complete text of the General Public License version 2 is included in the
-file LICENSE in each source tarball.  Version 2 is the only version of
-this license which toybox is distributed under.  (I.E. It doesn't have the
-strange "or later" dual license some projects have.)</p>
+file LICENSE in each source tarball, and again at the end of this page.
+Version 2 is the only version of this license which toybox is distributed
+under.  (I.E. It doesn't have the strange "or later" dual license some projects
+have.)</p>
 
 <h2>Clarifications</h2>
 
@@ -22,7 +23,8 @@ interpreting the sucker where it says something stupid.</p>
 individual source files.</b>  This doesn't mean you can change what license the
 code is under, or that you can remove other people's copyright notices.  You
 certainly can't change the test of the GPL itself.  What it means is that if
-you use this code in a project that distributes source in zip files instead of
+a file says "see file LICENSE in this tarball for details" and you use this
+code in a project that distributes source in zip files instead of
 tarballs, or your package's copy of the GPLv2 text isn't in a file called
 "LICENSE", it's silly to preserve an obsolete notice verbatim and add some
 kind of "correction" after the old notice.</p>
@@ -30,7 +32,7 @@ kind of "correction" after the old notice.</p>
 <p>Some lawyers seem to think a strict reading of GPLv2 section 1 (and later
 sections including section 1 by reference) requires maintaining old notices in
 perpetuity.  Even if you had code that used to be dual licensed, but created
-a derived work that's just under one of the two licenses, so the old license
+a derived work that's just under one of the two licenses, and the old license
 notice is not just strange or misleading but actually incorrect for the new
 file.  (For example, splicing GPLv2 only code into a dual "GPLv2 or later"
 project produces a result that can be distributed under the terms of GPLv2,
@@ -155,7 +157,7 @@ patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
 
   The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
 modification follow.
-
+
 		    GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
    TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
 
@@ -210,7 +212,7 @@ above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
     License.  (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but
     does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on
     the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
-
+
 These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If
 identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
 and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
@@ -268,7 +270,7 @@ access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent
 access to copy the source code from the same place counts as
 distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not
 compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
-
+
   4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program
 except as expressly provided under this License.  Any attempt
 otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is
@@ -325,7 +327,7 @@ impose that choice.
 
 This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to
 be a consequence of the rest of this License.
-
+
   8. If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in
 certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the
 original copyright holder who places the Program under this License