On Saturday 22 September 2001 11:39 pm, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > Yet Another Public License (YAPL) is a bad trend. > > Ceterus paribus, more licenses are bad. As the number of licenses > increases, the disruption caused by an additional license > increases. > > This is because interaction effects of licenses must be considered > on a combinatorial basis. That is, effects grow in a factorial > manner. The terms of each license must be understood > independently. The interactions of each license pair, *and each > combination of licences*, must be considered. What if, as part of the porcess of approving a new licence, the proposer of the license had to write a rationale of why a new license is necessary, and why no existing OSI-certified licence exists that does the job. Is this a good idea? -- *** Philip Hunt *** [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) John Cowan
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rob Myers
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) John Cowan
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rob Myers
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rob Myers
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rick Moen
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rick Moen
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rob Myers
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) phil hunt
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Chris Gray
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Russell Nelson
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Matthew C. Weigel
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Greg London
- GPL v. NDA (was Re: YAPL is bad) Matthew C. Weigel
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Steve Lhomme
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Rick Moen
- Re: YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?) Russell Nelson

