On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 03:58:07PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 02:37:32PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > Do you have any other examples of restrictions on modification that are (and > > should be) allowed? Since your premise is "_almost_ _any_ license", you > > should be able to find some examples in licenses that aren't confused by > > DFSG#10. > > Patch only licenses, must rename licenses, and must include disclaimer > licenses come to mind. GPL's "must supply source", and "can't add > further restrictions" are also both restrictions.
Patches and renames are explicitly allowed by DFSG#4. I already mentioned warranty disclaimers. "Must supply source" and "can't add further restrictions" are restrictions on distribution, not modification; they don't affect what modifications you can make. (I recall you had a lengthy discussion on the meaning of "can't add further restrictions" with Henning Makholm, and from that I suspect you may disagree with the latter, though I don't recall the entire dialog.) > I'm not going to bother talking about the LGPL. LGPL#3 makes most discussions about the LGPL wrt. the DFSG irrelevant. -- Glenn Maynard
