I did a little searching in the Notre Dame database on this issue and here is what I've come up with, for what it's worth...
 
PHPMyAdmin is in fact marked as having two licenses.  However, there is a field in the table linking projects with licenses called entity_type.  For the GNU license, this field's value is 3; for BSD, 21.  OssMole also has two records for its licenses, but the entity_type for both is 3. 
 
I have not been able to determine the meaning of the different entity_types yet.  There is not clear link table for them.  I did check, though and there are 26,670 license records with entity_type = 21 compared to 97,063 with entity_type = 3.
 
I have a request in to Notre Dame to see if they know how to interpret the entity_type. 

 
On 10/19/06, Megan Conklin <mconklin@elon.edu> wrote:
Hi moles, I received a message today from a user who was wondering
about some SF data anomalies. I have to confess that I didn't know
about these data differences between the search results and the actual
project page that he describes below (the message below is written
directly to SF, so when he says "your" he's talking about Sourceforge
in general, not FLOSSmole):

====
   1. The hidden metadata on your project list page (e.g.,
      http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php?form_cat=18 ),
      does not agree with the data on the project summary pages.  For
      example, the project list page linked above indicates that
      phpMyAdmin is licensed under both the GPL and BSD licenses.
      (To see the hidden metadata, go to the page, click "View Page
      Source," search for phpmyadmin, and scroll down to where it says
      "License:".)  But the project page at
      http://sourceforge.net/projects/phpmyadmin lists only the GPL.
      Which one is correct?

====

What he's saying is correct. There are two different versions of the
pages, and one lists two licenses for phpmyadmin and one lists one for
phpmyadmin.

As you know, we scrape the project pages individually, so if these are
in fact incorrect, this is a significant problem.

I checked a few other "multi-license" projects (such as FLOSSmole!)
and they seemed to be listed correctly on both the search and project
pages. So I'm not sure what the problem is - why would some project
pages be incorrect? Or, is it the search pages that are incorrect?

I've asked him to keep us abreast of the answers he gets from SF.

-megan

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Ossmole-discuss mailing list
Ossmole-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ossmole-discuss