Re: Eduardo Chappa's comments about his (al)pine patches

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>]

"John Halton" <johnhalton@gmail.com> writes:

> On 31/10/2007, Asheesh Laroia <debian-legal@asheesh.org> wrote:
> > "I myself do not care what people do with the patch as
> > long as they don't claim ownership."
> 
> As has been pointed out in the bug report thread, it would be better
> for all concerned if the author could just come out with a slightly
> more positive statement - "permissive", rather than just
> "non-restrictive", as it were.

Yes. An explicit grant of license, instead of an "I myself do not care
what people do" which gives only *implicit* license.

Those in communication with the author could suggest license terms
that explicitly provide the terms that seem to be implicit in the
author's words — in this case, I'd suggest the terms of the Expat
license <URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt>.

-- 
 \          "Better not take a dog on the space shuttle, because if he |
  `\   sticks his head out when you're coming home his face might burn |
_o__)                                             up."  -- Jack Handey |
Ben Finney