Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-31 Thread Francesco Poli
On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 08:28:45 +0200 Tobias Frost wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 02:43:34PM -0400, Jeffrey H. Johnson wrote: [...] > > 5. As state above, there is concern at the phrasing of "the Software" as > > used in these licenses (such as zlib), when applied strictly to > > documentation. We

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-30 Thread Tobias Frost
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 02:43:34PM -0400, Jeffrey H. Johnson wrote: (IANAL, IANFTPM (I am not ftp master), etc.) I hope you can really find a way to use a standard license. License profiliration is really becoming harmful to FOSS. ENOTIME for a complete reply to your mail, but two remarks: (..

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-30 Thread Jeffrey H. Johnson
I thank everyone for the feedback, Rather than address every individual point of the replies, or propose updated text, it might be most helpful to explain the intent. I absolutely will take into consideration and agree with comments and concerns regarding license proliferation. The documentation/

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-30 Thread Francesco Poli
On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 20:16:57 -0400 Jeffrey H. Johnson wrote: > Greetings, > > I'm contacting the list to inquire regarding the acceptability > of the following proposed documentation license, as I'd like to > ensure that it will become be an impediment to having > documentation licensed under it

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-29 Thread Walter Landry
J.B. Nicholson writes: > Jeffrey H. Johnson wrote: >> Redistribution and use in ‘source’ [...] and ‘compiled’ forms [...] in whole >> or in >> part, for any purpose, including commercial applications, with or without >> modification, in any medium, is hereby permitted, without fee or royalty, >>

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-29 Thread J.B. Nicholson
On 2021-08-29 11:03 PM, Walter Landry wrote: The license looks to me like it is saying that anyone distributing the work does not have to pay a fee to the original author. It does not prohibit the distributor from imposing fees on end recipients. Otherwise, the blurb about 'commercial applicatio

Re: Acceptability of a documentation license for Debian

2021-08-29 Thread J.B. Nicholson
Jeffrey H. Johnson wrote: I'm contacting the list to inquire regarding the acceptability of the following proposed documentation license, as I'd like to ensure that it will become be an impediment to having documentation licensed under it added to Debian in the future. The DPS8M license version