Bug#201883: base-files: Please include Zope Public License in /usr/share/common-licenses
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:53:18AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Source packages seems right; licenses are applied to package
> sources, not binaries.
>
> So, if there are at least 5% of the source packages (or
> whatever number emerges from the debate that is sure to follow), we
> can include the license into common license. A nice, objective
> criteria for admission ;-)
I've already considered relative number of packages like a X% of Debian
packages, but considering olso the (not so) constantly increasing number of
packages, this king of approach may (eventually) bring a license to be
considered common from once in a while to once but never again and so.
Just, instead, think to a suite of packages like zope and related zope-*: when
an administrator think about installing that kind of group of packages, he
whould rater install less than 15 zope-* pacakges from a list of 37 which
belongs to, more or less, 30 different sources. Almost all are distributed
under the term of ZPL (now 2.0), which means, at least 15 times, the
duplication of the same license in an system that (most probably) would have
no more than 150 package or so.
That may be considered common as well, but...
> I strongly object to the dilution of the term common by
[...]
> What does common mean anyway?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2. Belonging to or shared by, affecting or serving, all the
> members of a class, considered together; general; public;
> as, properties common to all plants; the common schools;
> the Book of Common Prayer.
> common
> adj 1: belonging to or participated in by a community as a whole;
> public; "for the common good"; "common lands are set
> aside for use by all members of a community" [ant: {individual}]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
[...]
I see your point, so i would change my proposal.
I propose to consider common, any license referenced by at least X% of source
packages in archive at the time of the request for inclusion (to avoid great
fluctuation of this number). License might not be considered any more common,
if it is referenced by less then Y% source packages in the archive at the
time of the requesti for removal. base-files maintainer (or policy team: i
don't no what would be better) may consider an evalueation period before
deciding to remove it.
(I suggest X to be 10, and Y to be 8)
If it's ok i would like policy to add a comment like that:
Large group of packages shareing a common license might consider to have a
leader package installing their common license under /usr/share/common-license
> I think this proposal is a bad idea.
I hope it's better now.
ciao,
--
Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well
aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][A-Za-z\-]*[iy]'\?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have
Luca, a wannabe ``Good guy''. | something in common: they
local LANG="it_IT@euro" | don't depend on the language.
Reply to: