Re: FSDG-compatibility of APSL-2.0

[zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 at 18:02, Philip McGrath <philip@philipmcgrath.com> wrote:

> I don't want to speak for Maxime, but AIUI the question was whether Guix ought 
> to continue to accept all licenses on that list, or instead ought adopt some 
> different (more stringent?) license policy.

FWIW, I think that adopting a different (more stringent) license policy
hits two issues:

 1. Where do you draw the line?  Based on which concrete principles to
 decide for this or for that?

 Here, each time we discuss license policy, it is some WANL sessions
 [1].  Therefore, the line cannot be drawn using legal consideration (as
 FSF does and then used by the GNU project).

 How to draw the line?  Using my personal perception?  Using yours?  How
 do we resolve the disagreements?

 I think it is not affordable to adopt a different license policy than
 the one listed by the GNU project [2].  It is a pragmatical line
 because the Guix project does not have the manpower nor the structure
 to do differently.


 2. The GNU project is already strict on what is accepted; for good
 reasons.  The Guix project is a niche and being more stringent would
 lead to be an even more niche.  And I miss what aim it would serve.


1: <https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-11-24.log#172129>
2: <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html>


Cheers,
simon