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

Strange restrictions

On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 12:59:08AM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
> Mind you, I don't think I'd necessarily have an issue with "To use this
> trademark, you must run a publically reviewable bug tracking system and
> implement some form of version management" (I might still, on a question
> of practicality, or even a basic question of "Does this make it a required
> cost of the software, and is that OK?", but it would be a matter of another
> debate entirely, at that point).

The problem with this sort of clause is usually the same: what the
hell does it mean?

"publically reviewable bug tracking system" and "some form of version
management" are at best vague. Far and away the most likely cause of
trouble later will be to do with the definition of these terms.

I could use a mailing list archive for the former and a web server
full of tarballs for the latter - and indeed, this is all that many
projects do in the real world. I would also say from experience that
this is *more* useful, and easier to use, than bugzilla and cvs. But
what actually qualifies as satisfying a restriction such as this?

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: