Hi again, :-) [email protected] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> What are you replying to? For some reason, your initial message didn’t make it through Gmane (!). For those who missed it, here it is: http://mail.cs.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/2010-February/003911.html . We quickly discussed it at FOSDEM, but I’d like to summarize my position. If find the “license calculus project” you have in mind interesting, but I’m skeptical about its practicality. The reason is that this whole idea assumes that legal texts written in natural languages, subject to human interpretation, can be reasoned about in a mathematical way. I think this assumption doesn’t hold, unfortunately. Even if the interpretation of law and licenses were unambiguous, stable in time, context-independent, etc., other practical issues would make it very hard to automatically reason on software licensing. A few examples: * What is “the license” of OpenOffice.org? * What is “the license” of Teeworlds? (It’s home-made.) * What is “the license” of GNU Guile once you’ve typed ‘(use-modules (ice-9 readline))’? (libguile is LGPLv2+, but that module is GPLv3+ as it dlopens GNU Readline.) * Is the Open Font License (OFL) FSF-free? (See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.gnu-linux-libre/406 for a discussion.) * Can you write a predicate that tells whether a given library is a “System Library” according to the GPL? ... As a Free Software supporter, I’m taking the straightforward approach of removing software that doesn’t correspond to my policy: http://repo.or.cz/w/nixpkgs-libre.git . Join us now, share the software! :-) Thanks, Ludo’.
pgpfPfs2wmlxL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
