Request for checking GPL compatibility

[Wilson, Andrew]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:

>Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Below is the result of my attempt to distill the SleepyCat license
>> into the the MIT license template (everything is same as the MIT
>> license except the conditions paragraph in the middle).
>
>Why do you want to do this?  You could achieve much the same purpose
>with the GPL itself or of course the original Sleepycat.  Making a new
>(apparently equivalent) license doesn't really make things easier.  It
>means there's just one more license to read over.

Echoing Matthew, exactly what is the motivation for your license?
Please consider the unwritten, but still becoming more
commonly accepted, 'OSD #11' which discourages new open
source licenses which are duplicative of existing licenses.
In your case, please clarify why Sleepycat, or LGPL (since
it does not appear you want source code obligations to
spread by linking) would not suffice.

Your license is admirably concise, though.  ;-)

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center