Re: PHP-Nuke: A calling for votes
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 17:24, Richard Braakman wrote:
> My rule of thumb is that if you ever find yourself in a situation where
> the technically ideal solution is blocked by software licensing, then
> you're not dealing with free software. This is my version of freedom 0.
> (You could always get around software licensing by reimplementing the
> software in question... but that's why I don't consider it free software.)
So, any license which is incompatible with any other is non-free?
> The GPL skirts the edge of this: for example, the requirement to
> distribute source is ok because you can include a "written offer"
> if there's no room for the source. (Even this has its problems, though.
> If you're launching an interplanetary probe that uses GPLed software,
> do you have include a source CD? Or carve the offer into the probe's
> hull? Every byte might count. I'd go for the offer, and hope that
> Martians will request the source so that we can make them pay for
> the next probe.)
The offer also only needs to be good for three years -- by the time the
Martians get a reply out, it's probably too late :) Still, if you're
sending software to space, it's *good* to include the source code, so
that they can alter the software to send the probe back to us.
> I think 2(a) and 2(c) go over the edge. For 2(a), there are file
> formats where it's difficult to add a change history. People seem
> to deal with that by ignoring it.
We ought to allow changelogs there, I agree.
-Dave Turner Stalk Me: 617 441 0668
"On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters
of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson