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

Re: Hacking License

Giacomo Tesio writes ("Re: Hacking License"):
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 17:29, Ian Jackson
> >  I think Giacomo would be well served by adopting AGPLv3+ and
> > nominating himself as licence steward.
> Thanks for your suggestion.
> Unfortunately AGPLv3 doesn't cover many of the issues I try to address
> with the Hacking License.

Well, these things are a tradeoff, aren't they ?

Are you more concerned about on the one hand, the ability of people to
use your code in larger projects, and distribute it easily, and so
on ?

Or are you really convinced that these other issues are showstoppers
and that without handling them in your licence, downstreams will abuse
their position ?  Frankly that doesn't seem particularly likely.

I think maybe you are seriously undervaluing the benefits of using a
licence that everyone already knows and that is compatible with many
other Free Software licences.

> Also, changing the license steward on an AGPLv3+ could cause serious
> confusion to users in the long term.

I think you must have misunderstood me.  I meant that you would avail
yourself of this paragraph of AGPLv3 s14:	

  If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future
  versions of the GNU Affero General Public License can be used, that
  proxy's public statement of acceptance of a version permanently
  authorizes you to choose that version for the Program.

You would nominate yourself, presumably.  Then if you engage with
copyleft-next and a new licence (an AGPL successor perhaps) appears
that you like you can use that.

Another alternative that you should seriously consider is to dual
licence your code.

Anyway, I agree very strongly with Ben Finney's criticisms of your
approach.  I don't think engaging with the detail of your licence text
is a good use of Debian's time.  Nor is this mailing list a good
drafting review panel anyway.

I recommend to my fellow Debian Developers that they do not try to
introduce into Debian a package with this licence.  In particular,
I would recommend to my fellow DDs not to sponsor such a package.
That will save ftpmaster the bother of reviewing this licence.


Reply to: