Distinguo. I have not *pressured* the author to dual license; that is, I have not exercised force or undue influence (of which I have none). I have *asked* them to do so and presented arguments in favor of it. A fortiori, I am not asking them to bow to me, but to act if they agree with my reasoning. Please retract the word "pressure".
In addition, I did not know (though I certainly should have checked) that the guile-json copyright has remained with the author rather than being assigned to the FSF. I will communicate directly with the author. On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 1:19 PM Mark H Weaver <[email protected]> wrote: > I wrote: > > Zelphir could propose a SRFI for the API only, with no reference > > implementation. The existing implementation could remain copylefted. > > John Cowan <[email protected]> replied: > > Unfortunately not. A SRFI must have a sample implementation to get > > finalized (otherwise it is feared there would be too many WIBNI SRFIs). > > The implementation doesn't have to be portable, but it has to have the > > correct license. > > That's unfortunate. I stand corrected. > > Nonetheless, I find it regrettable that you've chosen to pressure a > library author on a GNU project forum to abandon copyleft licensing. > Personally, I don't think that SRFIs are important enough to justify > bowing to such pressure. Guile-JSON's association with Guile and Guix > is enough for it to gain wide adoption, whether it is a SRFI or not. > That said, it is of course Aleix's decision how to license his library. > > Thanks, > Mark >
