Request for Comment http://www.buni.org/mediawiki/index.php/GAP_Against

[Andrew C. Oliver]

Ben Tilly wrote:
>
> As I mentioned in my discussion with Rick Moen, I believe that many of
> the UI issues are also potential OSD #6 violations.  For instance a
> requirement for a logo of a given size prevents developing derivative
> code for conveying information over mobile telephones or to blind
> people.
>
> Therefore even if one questions whether OSD #10 failed to capture the
> intent of the Board at that time, those are still issues under OSD #6.
>
Can you complete your argument here in a more digestible form?  If not I 
will attempt to go back through the archive again and sort it out, but I 
was having trouble unraveling what subthreads were not based on GAP but 
other attribution licenses and which ones were.
>
> Similarly for the OSD #3 complaint, I think that argument is weak.
> Essentially it is, "If code under this license is combined with code
> from similar ones, the result becomes impractical."  However one gets
> the same effect from taking any pair of incompatible licenses and
> joining them together.  The best-known example is the GPL and any
> other license.  It may be argued that one may expect different
> licenses to generally be immiscible, here similar licenses are.  But
> we already have examples of that as well, namely the GPL with clause 8
> invoked is incompatible with the GPL.
>
Do you think it is weak enough that you can't agree with it at all and 
advocate its removal from the main paper?  Does anyone else agree with 
you?  I felt there was a rough enough consensus on OSD 3 to include the 
arguments.  Personally I agree there is less meat here than #10 which is 
why I included it first.

-- 
No PST Files Ever Again
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
Email, Calendaring, ease of configuration/administration
http://buni.org