Glenn Maynard writes: > > > (On the same note, the patch exception in DFSG#4 has got to go; patch > > > clauses prohibit code reuse entirely. Some day ...) > > > > Patch clauses only prohibit code reuse if your build system is > > insufficiently complicated. > > If I'm reusing a function from one project with a patch clause, sure. I > can distribute my entire project as a patch against the project whose > code I'm reusing. That's hardly reasonable. It also prohibits me from > using public CVS for my project, since that would perform distribution > of the modified reused code in a form other than a patch against the > original.
It is pretty hard for me to think of a function that is usable on its own, useful enough to merit reuse in another project, and too large or subtle to be rewritten rather than deal with a patch-clause license. If that worst case is as rare as I think it is, is it noticably worse than the GPL's effective requirement to keep DVDs full of source code on-hand at expos? Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
