Simple Public License, v0.20

[Seth David Schoen]

John Cowan writes:

> Justin Wells scripsit:
> 
> > > Your improvement must not cause our software to depend on additional 
> > > software unless that additional software is distributed to the public under 
> > > a license which allows everyone to use and distribute it free of charge; 
> 
> I don't remember if I raised this point before, but this seems to say
> that a patch allowing the software to run on Windows or VMS is impermissible,
> since the patch makes the software "depend" on a non-free operating system.
> This is clearly discrimination against a class of users and as such
> forbidden by the OSD.

It's interesting to compare what the GPL does about this:

	... However, as a
	special exception, the source code distributed need not
	include anything that is normally distributed (in either
	source or binary form) with the major components (compiler,
	kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the
	executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the
	executable.

I think this gives OS vendors the ability to make proprietary
extensions to GPLed programs!

-- 
Seth David Schoen <schoen at loyalty.org>  | And do not say, I will study when I
Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/  | have leisure; for perhaps you will
down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF)  | not have leisure.  -- Pirke Avot 2:5