[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: LPPL, take 2

Branden Robinson writes:

 > >  > >   c. In every file of the Derived Work you must ensure that any
 > >  > >      addresses for the reporting of errors do not refer to the Current
 > >  > >      Maintainer's addresses in any way.
 > >  > 
 > >  > This is somewhat new ground for a DFSG-free license.  Is it *really*
 > >  > that important?  
 > > 
 > > yes, we think it is. It is protecting the original author and/or maintainer
 > > from receiving unnecessary misdirected (and that's the point) call for help
 > > support on a product for which he made no offer to support. again this may be
 > > a community difference, but in the TeX community people understand the
 > > bug/support address as an offer for to give support for a particular file
 > > (Work) in which it is found.
 > I understand the rationale.  I'm concerned about the wording.  Would the
 > following violate 5(c)?

on a slightly more serious note on that (how you read the whole of my last
posting :-) ...

 > It depends on what you mean by "in any way".
 > >  > Note that I'm not passionately opposed to 5c); 
 > > 
 > > I hope so; that becoming a stumbling block would be a shame.
 > Well, it's only a stumbling block if your understanding of it is very,
 > very aggressive, or if the license affords a very, very aggressive
 > interpretation of that clause.

i' not set on the phrasing of that part at all, in fact i think I can blame
Jeff for the current wording  :-) I'm very much in favor of a clear license.

just for the record, here is what was/is in LPPL 1.2

  6. You must change any addresses in the modified file for the
     reporting of errors in the file or in The Program generally to
     ensure that reports for files no longer maintained by the original
     maintainers will be directed to the maintainers of the modified

i think that is clearer as the current wording, it would't fit this way in the
new license, though. In fact i think the above is also asking for too much
looking at it now, i guess what is really wanted is simply:

   You must change or remove any addresses in the Derived Work for the
   reporting of errors to ensure bug reports for the Derived Work are not
   mistakenly directed to the maintainers of the original Work.

better? (too late for me now, to think further about it)

good night

Reply to: