Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-ft-03.txt> (A Fast-Track way to RFC with Running Code) to Experimental RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 01/11/2013 01:02 PM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Sorry for replying to this "advise to secretariat" thread and not to the 
> ietf-announce thread--I'm not subscribed to ietf-announce. I have three
> comments, and regret that I have not followed all of the discussions
> regarding this draft before, so please advise if those comments have
> already been raised and/or resolved.
> 
> 
> First, I'm glad that the direct preferences of open source implementations 
> over implementations compliant with other business models are mostly gone. 
> Still, there is one reference that worries me, and that is the reference to
> GPLv3 code as an "extreme" in section 2.1.  Yes, the GPL (and similar 
> copyleft licenses) is an extreme, at least in terms of open source 
> licensing models.  However, it is not an extreme of openness or 
> accessibility of the source code for review by WG chair, AD, and community.
> I would hope that we are all aware that many (most?) commercial software
> developers, by company policy or common sense, avoid looking at GPL-ed
> code, out of fear of contamination of their own closed source code.  GPL-ed
> code  is, therefore, inaccessible for verification by a large part of the
> IETF community,

Commercial software developers can do whatever they want, how idiotic it is
(see Oracle vs Google), that does not make them an example to follow.

I think that you underestimate the IETF community, who certainly know how to
see through all the FUD about the GPL.  Sure it may be a bad idea to literally
copy 300 lines of GPL code in your code, but that does not apply to what we
are talking about, which is reading code.

> and does not serve as a good example for "openness", which is how I
> interpret the spectrum laid out in section 2.1.  A better example would be
> source code that is almost universally accessible.  The extreme here would
> be source code in the public domain. Somewhat less convincing but perhaps a
> bit more realistically, source code under a BSD-style license like the one
> the IETF Trust is using.


- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
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=+5ox
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]