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

Re: DFSG#10 and the Open Source Initiative

On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 03:58:07PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 02:37:32PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > Do you have any other examples of restrictions on modification that are (and
> > should be) allowed?  Since your premise is "_almost_ _any_ license", you
> > should be able to find some examples in licenses that aren't confused by
> > DFSG#10.
> Patch only licenses, must rename licenses, and must include disclaimer
> licenses come to mind.  GPL's "must supply source", and "can't add
> further restrictions" are also both restrictions.

Patches and renames are explicitly allowed by DFSG#4.  I already mentioned
warranty disclaimers.  "Must supply source" and "can't add further restrictions"
are restrictions on distribution, not modification; they don't affect
what modifications you can make.

(I recall you had a lengthy discussion on the meaning of "can't add
further restrictions" with Henning Makholm, and from that I suspect you
may disagree with the latter, though I don't recall the entire dialog.)

> I'm not going to bother talking about the LGPL.

LGPL#3 makes most discussions about the LGPL wrt. the DFSG irrelevant.

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: