Hello all, Some time ago I requested comments on the BXAPL - which is an open-source license currently under development.
It is a license which tries to cover two kinds of software, 'normal' software and also - as a separate category - programming tools. The license imposes slightly less stringent restrictions on users of programming tools. Because various sections in the license apply differently for the two kinds of software, the language of the license has become rather unwieldy in places, making the license difficult to read and understand. This was never my intention, so I'm trying to explore alternatives. I have thought of splitting the license into two licenses: one for 'normal' software and one for 'programming tools'. The disadvantage would be that this creates an awful lot of redundancy. Packages containing both types of software would need to include both license texts, etc. Another approach might be to split only those licenses which apply differently for each kind of software. Less redundancy, more clarity - I'd guess. Does anyone have other arguments or ideas? All comments are most welcome. For those who are interested, you can find the last version of the license proposal on our site: http://www.bixoft.nl/english/license.htm Thanks for your attention, Abe Kornelis. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
