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

Re: License review for lsblibchk



[No MFT was set, so not Cc:'ing...]

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Matt Taggart wrote:
> libchk End User Licence
> _______________________

[SNIP]

> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> it under the terms of the "Artistic License" which comes with this
> Kit, with the following modification:
>         a) "executable(s)" should be interpreted to include
>           "test case(s)"

This may interact with clause 3 and 4 and what you can do in the
source...

>         b) if you wish to make changes as defined in clause 2 and 3, and
>          distribute a modified version of this package, then
>         clauses 3c and 4c are required

Clause 2 involves changes which can be made to the Standard Version
and still have it considered to be the Standard Version. By default 3c
and 4c have nothing to do with Clause 2.

Furthermore, following 3c and 4c is likely to be a serious technical
issue, as every single executable or test case patched will have to
include the original unpatched executable or test case, with the
original name. This is worse than the renaming problem we had with
LaTeX, and I'm not sure if there's an easy way to work around this in
the package [not being familiar with the package.]

Finally, the unpatched executables become (in effect) unmodifyable
unremovable bits of cruft. This seems to be in conflict with DFSG #3
and #4.

>         c) Clause 7 is rephrased as follows: "Subroutines supplied by
>	 you and linked into this Package shall not be considered part
>	 of this Package".

This doesn't really affect the freeness of the license, afaict.


I really which I understood why they try to enforce the technical
standards present in the LSB by adding b). Since the whole point of
the library is to test compliance with LSB, and such compliance is not
mandatory, I see no reason why anyone would modify the library in such
a way as to break LSB compliance anyway.

Perhaps the authors can be convinced to remove b? [In that case, I
would think that the license would qualify as DFSG Free.]


Don Armstrong

-- 
CNN/Reuters: News reports have filtered out early this morning that US
forces have swooped on an Iraqi Primary School and detained 6th Grade 
teacher Mohammed Al-Hazar. Sources indicate that, when arrested,
Al-Hazar was in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square and
a calculator. US President George W Bush argued that this was clear
and overwhelming evidence that Iraq indeed possessed weapons of maths 
instruction.

http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Attachment: pgpBn14qHG8lY.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: