Re: Werken Public License
I agree with your call on the DFSG #9 violation, it's not currently Open
> From: Brian Ristuccia <email@example.com>
> * You may not distribute a modified version of this software without
> providing source code.
Doesn't violate DFSG #2 _or_its_intent_. This clause is not unlike one in
> * We will continue to distribute bake in source form under the WPL.
I think this is meant to be a promise regarding future versions, but the
language is not specific enough that they could be held to it.
> * We reserve the right to offer bake under additional different
It's their right for any code they hold the copyright to, but what about
> * Any changes or patches received and included will be covered under
> the same licenses as bake itself.
Not quite the right language. Do they intend to have the right to issue
modifications under "additional different licenses"? If so, they need to say it the way the NPL says it.
This is probably another "means well but needs some license education" case.