On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 18:31, Ian Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Or are you really convinced that these other issues are showstoppers > and that without handling them in your licence, downstreams will abuse > their position ? Frankly that doesn't seem particularly likely. This library implements a distributed file system protocol designed to replace NFS, SMB, 9P2000 and HTTP/*. I'm SURE that, without proper handling of these issues in the license, downstreams will abuse their position just like they do with SaaSS. If I have to choose between - the ability of corporations to use my code in larger products _without_reading_the_license_ - the ability of all people to study, modify and self-host the applications they use through my distributed system I have no doubt. I choose the second. As a Debian user since Potato, I simply hope to give back a little by tweaking the license text so that it clearly enable Debian to distribute this Free Software. > Anyway, I agree very strongly with Ben Finney's criticisms of your > approach. I don't think engaging with the detail of your licence text > is a good use of Debian's time. Nor is this mailing list a good > drafting review panel anyway. The point of this thread was not to review drafts but to address compatibility issues with Debian. Indeed I tried my best to address all concerns emerged so far, including Xavier's, Thorsten's and David's ones, in the last version I just published at http://www.tesio.it/documents/HACK.txt This because I read in the Debian's web site that this is the proper place to discuss licensing issues for prospective packages. > I recommend to my fellow Debian Developers that they do not try to > introduce into Debian a package with this licence. In particular, > I would recommend to my fellow DDs not to sponsor such a package. > That will save ftpmaster the bother of reviewing this licence. I guess this is a political recommendation with the weight of an order. Is there something I can do about it? If the problem is not in the text of the license, how can I fix it? > Sorry, > Ian. No problem. In no way I intended to abuse this mailing list. And I'm sorry if you felt abused somehow. However, if you express the consensus in Debian, I suggest to fix the texts at https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/ and at https://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq so that it more clearly express the intents, boundaries and goals of this mailing list. Giacomo
