[License-discuss] Intimacy in open source (SSPL and AGPL)
bruce at perens.com
Tue Jan 22 23:22:43 UTC 2019
Nobody will ever make such a statement, because it would make it easier for
you to do things they don't want you to do.
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 2:18 PM Nicholas Matthew Neft Weinstock <
nweinsto at qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> A clear statement about API interaction sounds like it would go a long way
> to clarify this section.
> Some additional considerations:
> - What about internal vs external APIs, so internal APIs are
> “intimate” but external APIs aren’t, similar to the Kernel’s UAPI?
> - Could a library require API callers be under (A)GPLv3? Or would it
> need to use something like the Kernel’s MODULE_LICENSE interface?
> - What is necessary for API extensions to be considered “documented
> user calls and data structures”? Is it sufficient for the maintainers to
> integrate source modifications even if the accompanying documentation isn’t
> updated? Is it sufficient for source modifications to be publicly
> submitted to the maintainers? What if either of those were maintainers of
> a distinct fork rather than the original project? Is it sufficient for me
> to publish my modified version on my personal GitHub page as a one-time
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-discuss