Does anyone have any further comments about the Adaptive Public License?
--Carmen
Russell Nelson wrote:
Carmen Leeming writes:
Title: Adaptive Public License
Submission:
http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:6913:200305:bogcdnbbhnfbgpdeahob
License: http://www.mamook.net/APL.html
Russ Nelson called for more discuccion of this license, which does look
interesting to me. The OSI board has certainly spent its share of time talking
about license compatibility (or the lack thereof), and this license certainly
encapsulates many of the issues we've discussed. My initial read of
Michael - I agree with you regarding whether this license solves a problem
that an existing license does not. I think the drafter will have to
explain; otherwise, I would not recommend approval of the Adaptive Public
License since it is not attached to a specific project and appears
The way the Adaptive Public License is set up, only the Initial
Contributor sets the terms outlined in Exhibit A (all the adaptive
elements). Subsequent Contributors may not alter the variables outlined
by the Initial Contributor. However, Subsequent Contributors are not
bound by those terms
on
the basis that it meets your needs and that its popularity or well-known
status signals its terms to many open source users (e.g., GNU GPL). I do not
see the Adaptive Public License fitting the last category since the license
is adaptive; in other words, its terms will vary. Nearly any license can
I am sorry for the confusion in my previous email regarding our
application of the Adaptive Public License. We have developed a
specific program that we wish to distribute as open source. Our
requirements were not met by any existing license. We therefore hired a
lawyer to aid in drafting
for the confusion in my previous email regarding our
application of the Adaptive Public License. We have developed a
specific program that we wish to distribute as open source. Our
requirements were not met by any existing license. We therefore hired
a lawyer to aid in drafting a new license that would
.
On Apr 15, 2004, at 6:58 PM, Carmen Leeming wrote:
I am sorry for the confusion in my previous email regarding our
application of the Adaptive Public License. We have developed a
specific program that we wish to distribute as open source. Our
requirements were not met by any existing
Well, I have finally plowed through all nineteen pages of the Adaptive
Public License, and here are my comments on it.
This is a semi-reciprocal license like the MPL: you must share changes
by issuing derivative works under the APL, but APL works can be embedded
into a Larger Work (capitalized
Based on the suggestions I have been given, I have modified the Adaptive
Public License and have re-posted it as version 0.1C.
http://mamook.net/APL.html
The following changes were made:
- One sentence within section 3.2 did not conform to the rules of Open
Source. The sentence has been
John, thank you for taking the time to review the entire license. My
responses to your comments/suggestions are embedded below:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
SHOW-STOPPER:
Though the APL is MPL-ish in nature, it has a few provisions modeled after
the GPL, but intensified in such a way that I
Carmen Leeming scripsit:
A Distributor may choose to distribute the Licensed Work, or any
portion thereof, in Executable form (an EXECUTABLE DISTRIBUTION) to
any third party, under the terms of Section 2 of this License, provided
the Executable Distribution is made available under and
On Apr 14, 2004, at 11:26 PM, Russell Nelson wrote:
Unfortunately, even after two tries there have been insufficient
comments on the Adaptive Public License. Maybe the third's the charm?
Title: Adaptive Public License
Submission:
http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:6913:200305
13 matches
Mail list logo
