[License-review] New License for review: ADVPL 1.0

[Carlo Piana]

----- Messaggio originale -----
> Da: "Josh Berkus" <josh at berkus.org>
> A: "License submissions for OSI review" <license-review at lists.opensource.org>, "Eric Schultz" <eric at wwahammy.com>, "Ω
> Alisson" <thelinuxlich at gmail.com>
> Inviato: Martedì, 10 settembre 2024 2:11:25
> Oggetto: Re: [License-review] New License for review: ADVPL 1.0

> On 9/5/24 09:50, Eric Schultz wrote:
>> Some people on this list have expressed that some non-operative
>> preambles could preclude a license from being OSD compliant. I don't
>> think I agree with that conclusion but you should be aware of that.
> 
> Seems unlikely?  That might require us to rule the GPL as non-compliant,
> and I'm for sure not going there.

Indeed the GPL is a good example. But in general, I don't see how a non-operative preamble,  which by definition is not prescriptive and doesn't impose any burden nor removes anything from the freedom neither by adding anything to the conditions could be considered against OSD, except for very marginal cases which are not worthwhile mentioning.

> 
> The only way I can see a preamble as an OSD violation is if it
> *appeared* to contain conditions.  The 7 tenets here would not qualify,
> they don't obligate the recipient to do anything.
> 

I agree. This is why I have suggested that maybe they could belong in a preamble. Then again, I would not regard this as a different license -- as a legal deed -- to deserve an approval.

So, while this sub-thread is a somewhat interesting intellectual exercise, it is my very personal and non official opinion that discussing the license further is an inefficient use of our time.

All the best,

Carlo