Stuff we've discussed on IRC.
Posted by azz at 2006-01-17 17:05
Yes, that's Aerobie as in the frisbie manufacturers -- but I guess it's still precision plastic moulding either way...
This sounds like a pretty neat gadget; it's effectively an upside-down one-cup cafetiere. The only worry I'd have is that it wouldn't produce enough coffee for the sort of mugs I usually drink...
Posted by azz at 2006-01-17 00:06
First draft of the GPL version 3.
Executive summary: unless they make major changes to this draft, I will not be releasing further software under the GPL.
Specific things that irritate me:
Expanding DRM as "Digital Restrictions Management" is every bit as childish as saying something like "Microsuck". Jokes do not belong in a software license.
The new license is ~4600 words, whereas GPLv2 was ~3000. GPLv2 is already ridiculously long; shipping 60k of license text is just silly.
The change from "The act of running the Program is not restricted" to "This License gives unlimited permission to privately modify and run the Program, provided you do not bring suit for patent infringement against anyone for making, using or distributing their own works based on the Program." makes me distinctly uneasy.
I agree loosely with what it's trying to do -- heck, if I could get away with not licensing my software to anybody who'd ever filed a patent lawsuit, I would -- but one of the important things about the free software and open source movements is that we don't restrict who can use our code.
I suspect that makes the GPL non-DFSG-free ("The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons"). Which is obviously ridiculous.
There are distinct shades of Animal Farm about that "unlimited permission ... provided".
5a ("The modified work must carry prominent notices stating that you changed the work and the date of any change.") -- the most frequently-infringed bit of the GPL -- is still as fuzzy as ever, with the slight relaxation that it now talks about the "work" rather than the "files" (which lets you put the change notices in a ChangeLog, as all the FSF software has been doing for years in violation of their own licenses).
5c (the rule about displaying copyright notices prominently in interactive software) I've always disliked, and I like it even less now it has a complicated set of rules about menus attached.
6c is absurdly fuzzy. "This alternative is allowed only for occasional noncommercial distribution"? What's that supposed to mean?
Section 7 is deeply scary.
It allows you to fork a GPL-licensed program and add your own more-restrictive terms to the license -- so someone could modify rawdog, add an irritating legal notice or patent retaliation clause or source-disclosure clause to their changes, and thus restrict me from merging them back in unless I made an equivalent change to my license.
I'm not even convinced that I agree with the intention.
"In GPLv3 we take a new approach to the issue of combining GPL'd code with code governed by the terms of other free software licenses" -- I don't think that's very "similar in spirit" to previous versions of the GPL.
Things I like about the new license over GPLv2:
The warranty disclaimer is no longer ALL IN CAPITAL LETTERS. (Although whether this survives in the final form of the license remains to be seen.)
... well, that's pretty much it.