[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: (re-)evaluation of

From: bill-auger
Subject: Re: (re-)evaluation of
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:14:46 -0400

On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 00:47:48 -0400 Richard wrote:
> let's shorten it as
>   - C5 - No other license is recommended over GPL 3-or-later.

that inversion is perfect - it is not only shorter, it is more
clear, that C5 is reasonably trivial to pass, if only by not
"recommending" or "encouraging" _any_ licensing

that is the most common case - notabug is the only one i know
of, which makes any attempt to "recommend" or "encourage" any
licensing - but that is only indirectly; because notabug forbids
non-free licenses generally

>   - A2 - Recommends GPL 3-or-later over others

i left A2 undecided for notabug; because its not clear what that
entails - probably that would only be evident in the form of
documentation - for example, would it be sufficient to pass A2,
if i convinced the notabug admin to add a line to the ToS, or
the license selector, like:

  "we recommend that your choose the GPLv3-or-later"

if so, then why not add a new criteria at the A+ level:

  "we recommend that your choose the AGPLv3-or-later"

reply via email to

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