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

Re: About a license of a package.

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:42:28 +1100 Ben Finney wrote:

> Separately, Francesco was (IIUC) pointing out that those license
> terms, as you presented them, define the term "Mesh" to refer to the
> software work, when that term is not typically used in such a way. It
> would be far clearer to instead use the more typical term "Software"
> or "Work" in the license terms.

They refer to the work by its very name (Mesh, in the present case),
thus creating an Expat/MIT variant which is specific to their piece of
software.  This is gratuitous license proliferation (license
proliferation is always bad, but especially so when it's gratuitous!),
and would generate an unnecessary duplication of permission notices as
soon as some extraneous Expat-licensed code is mixed with MakeHuman
Mesh (since two slightly different license texts would need to be
included in all copies of the derivative work of Mesh and the other
Expat-licensed work).


 New! Version 0.6 available! What? See for yourself!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpdabHktb_e3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: