Re: License texts with invariant sections
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I'm not arguing that this should change. I don't think there would be
>> any gain in that; it would increase the confusion level substantially
>> (license discussions get confusing enough without bringing meta-licenses
>> into it!), and it would only increase license proliferation.
> Here's an interesting thought. Suppose that we make such an exception
> explicit that license texts are allowed to contain invariant sections.
> Now what if I create a new license text and embed software documentation
> inside it with cover text saying that the license text must be distributed
> as a whole with no modifications?
> Will you allow software that is distributed with this license to enter
Well, OK, until we manage to figure out how to distribute licenses outside
of the packages they go with while still always distributing them.
But the license must only appear in the usr/share/doc/*/copyright file or
the /usr/share/common-licenses directory, and nowhere else. :-)
> If not then can you come up with a rule that is not ad hoc to
> distinguish licenses such as these from the GPL?
Well, there's always "Would Debian be able to function without stuff under
this license?" In the case of the GPL, the answer is probably 'no',
because of the shortage of BSD-licensed alternatives to GCC.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.