YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?)

[Steve Lhomme]

>Yet Another Public License (YAPL) is a bad trend.
>
>Ceterus paribus, more licenses are bad.  As the number of licenses
>increases, the disruption caused by an additional license increases.

Why do we need processors when we already have the transistor ? Why create
C++ when we already have C ? Why create Java when we already have C++ ?

That's what I called the evolution. People working with the
already-established-and-certified licenses may face some drawbacks or
express some needs that are not met by these licenses. So people should come
with newer licenses based on years of experience. That's why it would be
VERY bad if the OSI never certified a new license anymore.

>This is because interaction effects of licenses must be considered on a
>combinatorial basis.  That is, effects grow in a factorial manner.  The
>terms of each license must be understood independently.  The
>interactions of each license pair, *and each combination of licences*,
>must be considered.

I don't think the OSI has anything to do with that.

>> written from scratch, no reuse, no inheritance, no nothing.
>
>Law is not OOP.  Still, some of your concerns may be addressable.

I think the whole world can be expressed as an object. The law included.
Once you have a word for something, it's an object. So law is an object made
of objects called rights.

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3