[TAG] [lgang] Debian & OPL
Kapil Hari Paranjape
kapil at imsc.res.in
Wed Feb 21 04:48:18 MSK 2007
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Rick Moen wrote:
> The text of Open Publication License v. 1.0 ("OPL") can be read here:
> OPL can be summarised as a simple-permissive (as opposed to copyleft)
> licence authorising complete or partial reproductions _and_ authorising
> derivative works, with mandated references to the licence text and to the
> original work.
The one point I noticed on a quick reading of the license is that
the term "partial documents" is a bit unclear and would lead to the
usual "but I cannot extract a well thought out paragraph for use in a
man page" argument.
Regarding the "issue downloader" package you wrote:
> However, given what "debian-legal has concluded" [sic]
> about OPL, that package would probably end up in the contrib collection,
> for what it's worth.
Oops! I'd forgotten about that.
I agree with you that the OPL as applied to the LG issues is
The main problem is the following. Some licenses like the GPL are
"standard" and a package using those would have no problem getting
cleared. Each newer license (though the OPL is no longer new!) would
be subject to a review process that is more stringent than earlier.
And there are reasons why this should be so --- for example to avoid
having a lot of different licenses which have the same intent and
purpose with only minor differences.
Which is why I feel that packaging some documentation under OPL
requires a lot of commitment on the part of the maintainer to
convince Debian developers that this documentation with this license
is acceptable under DFSG.
 Some people have even suggested that the GPL may not have passed
such a review as easily if it was a late entrant!
 And large buckets of cold water to douse oneself every time
one got the urge to "feed the energy beast" after being subjected
to a lot of heated criticism.
 The alternative is to formulate a General Resolution which
asserts that the OPL without A and B is considered DFSG-free.
I believe that may be harder to get passed.
More information about the TAG