:: Re: [DNG] License for the DNG creat…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: tito
Date:  
To: dng
New-Topics: Re: [DNG] License for the DNG created software guide --> Proposal: DNG Verbatim Libre License
Subject: Re: [DNG] License for the DNG created software guide
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 14:26:52 -0400
Steve Litt <slitt@???> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> A discussion on this list about a month ago spawned several documents
> about programming best practices, which I have been calling the "DNG
> Software Guide", even though it's absolutely not sponsored or even
> approved by Devuan.
>
> With the latest version at
> http://troubleshooters.com/linux/presentations/golug_software_guide_20210901.tgz
> , it's mature enough to get a license and Git distribution. This email
> is about the license.
>
> If this were software, I'd probably vote for an extremely permissive
> license like the license of Expat (
> https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat ). However, this is
> documentation, and I'm a little afraid that people with insufficient
> knowledge, or with political agendas, will water it down with bullshit.
> Only skilled people can modify source code, but any fool can modify
> documentation.
>
> Because of https://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.html
> , I think the GFDL would be a bad choice.
>
> I've been thinking of this for weeks now, and I'm stumped. What license
> should we apply in order for this to be free and open information, and
> yet to the degree possible, limit contamination by the uninformed or
> the malicious?


Hi,

This are the Ten Commandments of software writing, have you ever heard
of somebody who wants to change the Ten Commandments?

Jokes aside there is no license whatsoever that will save your work
from idiots because there are so many and because they will in due time
find various and subtle ways to subvert and corrupt your work that you
cannot even imagine now.

The only helpful license is the one that forbids any modification,
or subordinately permits modifications only under your supervision
or under the supervision of a person appointed by you
(unless by error you appoint one of the aforementioned idiots. That would be a pity!).

I understand that this form of licensing is not propitious to encourage progress.

OTOH often I ask myself: Progress? what progress?

This are my pessimistic 2 cents.

Ciao,
Tito


> Thanks,
>
> SteveT
>
> Steve Litt
> Spring 2021 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful
> Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques