[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [DotGNU]Proposal for a introspector API into free software developme

From: David Sugar
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]Proposal for a introspector API into free software development toolchain
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 08:14:07 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0rc3) Gecko/20020523

I do happen to believe there may be places and situations where new licensing needs to be explored. For example we have the FDL for documentation, which has different issues to address than software, and there has been some efforts made to extend the GPL to be workable with web services where no code is "distributed" in the classical sense. However, all such efforts must be undertaken with an extreme measure of caution. The GPL itself is founded on a very solid and clever insight on copyright law that is unassailable. Many other licenses make the mistake of assuming how they think the law should operate rather than how it actually does. That is very easy trap to fall into and one we cannot afford to make in the GNU project. That being said, I do not discourage you at all from proposing a "GNU" or otherwise Free Software "infrastructure license", or to make a case why we may need such a seperate license, as it may well be that we might, but I do encourage a great deal of review of the question and the legal foundations of any specific license proposal before it is considered for actual use.

S11001001 wrote:

Hate to admit it, but this is way over my head. It is highly probable that the same goes for some lurkers here [on DotGNU], so....(insert proper request here)

BTW, would this follow the "Modest Proposal for a GNU infrastructure license"?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]