YAOSL - Yet Another Open Source License

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Fri Oct 15 20:54:18 UTC 1999

From: Alex Nicolaou <anicolao at cgl.uwaterloo.ca>
> You may not distribute versions of the software with your patch applied,
> although you may include your patches in a subdirectory of the software
> specifically provided for this purpose, or provide the software in an
> archive format designed to accomodate and apply your patches during
> installation on the end user's computer.

No current open source license prohibits the distribution of modified binaries.
I think you should require that they be marked clearly as modificatied
versions, but you need to allow them to be distributed.

Regarding the requirement to send back modifications even if they are only
being used internaly, does that mean I have to send them back with each
test run and edit? I think you should tie this to _public_performance_ rather
than internal development, or drop it.

Regarding the sending back of modifications - it's a big hassle to send them
back with _every_edit_ - consider the overhead on a distribution like Debian
if they had to synchronize with every developer before every beta test they
do. Also, you get mail-bombed with tons of useless deltas without any way to
review or classify them because people rig their CVS servers to send you a
delta at every check-in. What I negociated with ATT, IBM, Apple, etc. was that
the developer would submit to them a URL where the source code for what they
were distributing could always be found. That way, the developer only needed to
send one email upstream, and the upstream developer (you) always had an
better-organized place where you could see the developer's entire version
rather than a mess of uncategorized patches.



More information about the License-discuss mailing list