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

Re: libbitcoin license - AGPL with clauses added by SFLC and FSF

Quoting Paul Tagliamonte (2014-05-21 18:12:11)
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 06:06:38PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>> I can't figure out exactly what your previous concerns were but it's 
>>> good to hear that they're resolved.
>> For the record, my concern was not the AGPL (I am a fan of that too, 
>> and will most likely use it for my packaging work when Debian ships 
>> it in common-licenses).  Rather, the licensing text itself forbids 
>> editing, and previous revisions had the exceptions placed within the 
>> common AGPL license - now it is properly placed before the common 
>> license.
> It's not a change to the AGPL text, it's an Additional permission, as 
> defined by the (A)GPL. I see no issues, myself. In fact, it looks to 
> clarify an issue (by rounding down, not adding further restrictions) 
> that some consider to be problematic.
> Also, for clarity's sake, the AGPL text wasn't changed, the LICENSE 
> file contains more than just the license. At least, that's what I 
> guess by glancing at this file for a few seconds. I could be wrong.

Did those few seconds involve looking at the URL I rerferenced - 
specifically the location of the no-communication exception _before_ 
that commit (i.e. around lines 408-413)?


I agree that _after_ that commit there is no problem - which is my 
reason to write as I did initially in this thread.


 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: