License Questions

License Questions

[Mathias Hasselmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1121 bytes --]

Hello,

Sparse uses The Open Software License v. 1.1 which contains this clause:

        9) Acceptance and Termination. If You distribute copies of the
        Original Work or a Derivative Work, You must make a reasonable
        effort under the circumstances to obtain the express and
        volitional assent of recipients to the terms of this License.

What does this mean for hosting a public git repository[1] to organize
sparse patches? Do I have to put some "Accept License" page in front 
of it? How do I force git to show that "Accept License" page when
downloading from that repository? 

What does this clause mean for sending patches to the mailing list. 
Shouldn't the patches be attached as password protected source archive
and the message contain something like "By extracting that archive you
declare to obey the terms of The Open Software License"?

Maybe that password thing is a solution for making git repositories 
OSL compliant?

Thank you,
Mathias

[1] http://taschenorakel.de/git/sparse
-- 
Mathias Hasselmann <mathias.hasselmann@gmx.de>
http://taschenorakel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: License Questions

[Rob Taylor]

Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Sparse uses The Open Software License v. 1.1 which contains this clause:
> 
>         9) Acceptance and Termination. If You distribute copies of the
>         Original Work or a Derivative Work, You must make a reasonable
>         effort under the circumstances to obtain the express and
>         volitional assent of recipients to the terms of this License.
> 
> What does this mean for hosting a public git repository[1] to organize
> sparse patches? Do I have to put some "Accept License" page in front 
> of it? How do I force git to show that "Accept License" page when
> downloading from that repository? 
> 
> What does this clause mean for sending patches to the mailing list. 
> Shouldn't the patches be attached as password protected source archive
> and the message contain something like "By extracting that archive you
> declare to obey the terms of The Open Software License"?
> 
> Maybe that password thing is a solution for making git repositories 
> OSL compliant?

Oh dear, I just found out that Debian considers OSL 1.1 non-free, though
not for this clause (which does seem particularly onerous), but for
clause 10.

That could be a problem for us GLib guys, as that would force gnome into
contrib!

Rob

> Thank you,
> Mathias
> 
> [1] http://taschenorakel.de/git/sparse


-- 
Rob Taylor, Codethink Ltd. -  http://codethink.co.uk

Re: License Questions

[Rob Taylor]

Rob Taylor wrote:
> Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Sparse uses The Open Software License v. 1.1 which contains this clause:
>>
>>         9) Acceptance and Termination. If You distribute copies of the
>>         Original Work or a Derivative Work, You must make a reasonable
>>         effort under the circumstances to obtain the express and
>>         volitional assent of recipients to the terms of this License.
>>
>> What does this mean for hosting a public git repository[1] to organize
>> sparse patches? Do I have to put some "Accept License" page in front 
>> of it? How do I force git to show that "Accept License" page when
>> downloading from that repository? 
>>
>> What does this clause mean for sending patches to the mailing list. 
>> Shouldn't the patches be attached as password protected source archive
>> and the message contain something like "By extracting that archive you
>> declare to obey the terms of The Open Software License"?
>>
>> Maybe that password thing is a solution for making git repositories 
>> OSL compliant?
> 
> Oh dear, I just found out that Debian considers OSL 1.1 non-free, though
> not for this clause (which does seem particularly onerous), but for
> clause 10.
> 
> That could be a problem for us GLib guys, as that would force gnome into
> contrib!

FWIW, OSL 3.0 [1] is a lot more sane, but I'd guess relicensing is not
an option for sparse due to Transmeta holding some copyright.

An option for us glib guys would be to mandate only using sparse at make
dist time, I *think* that'd allow libraries using it to be considered
for 'main'

Thanks,
Rob

> Rob
> 
>> Thank you,
>> Mathias
>>
>> [1] http://taschenorakel.de/git/sparse
> 
> 


-- 
Rob Taylor, Codethink Ltd. -  http://codethink.co.uk

Re: License Questions

[Mathias Hasselmann]

> > Maybe that password thing is a solution for making git repositories 
> > OSL compliant?
> 
> Oh dear, I just found out that Debian considers OSL 1.1 non-free, though
> not for this clause (which does seem particularly onerous), but for
> clause 10.

Yup, out of all GPL incompatible licenses choosing OSL 1.1 probably was the worst one Linus could choose. Maybe this stupid licensing choice explains why this pretty code which sparse is doesn't get the attention it deserves... :-(
 
> That could be a problem for us GLib guys, as that would force gnome into
> contrib!

Library use and such should be pretty ok for us - according to Linus' annotations in the LICENSE file...

Ciao,
Mathias
-- 
Mathias Hasselmann
http://taschenorakel.de/mathias/

GMX FreeMail: 1 GB Postfach, 5 E-Mail-Adressen, 10 Free SMS.
Alle Infos und kostenlose Anmeldung: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freemail

Re: License Questions

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Mathias Hasselmann wrote:

> 
> Yup, out of all GPL incompatible licenses choosing OSL 1.1 probably was 
> the worst one Linus could choose. Maybe this stupid licensing choice 
> explains why this pretty code which sparse is doesn't get the attention 
> it deserves... :-(

Yeah, the OSL wasn't the best choice. I tried to change it (look in the 
sparse email archives) a few years ago, but I never got in contact with 
anybody at Transmeta back then who could have the power to relicense, and 
while my work with Linux has always been unquestionably mine (ie my work 
contract explicitly stated such), with sparse it isn't as obvious..

So back then, I couldn't get anybody to look at it (not that I tried all 
that hard), and I don't think I even have any contacts left to people I 
know at Transmeta any more.

		Linus