Subject: Re: Must publish vs. must supply
From: "Abe Kornelis" <>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:42:26 +0100

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Chris F Clark <>

> Me:
> > Obviously, item 2 must be under some restrictions, or there isn't any
> > "must" in your 3.
> Abe:
> --> I do not agree. The main restriction is that you keep your
>       modifications private. The base line is: either keep them private
>       *or* distribute to the public. Nothing in between.
> I'm sorry I misunderstood you also, and I apologize if I hijacked your
> ideas and took them in a direction you didn't intend for them to go.
--> No problem - I kinda like these discussions.

> Avoiding "selective" secrecy (keeping modifiers (creators of derived
> works) from publishing only to their customers, but not to the world)
> is a reasonable goal for one to attempt to achieve in a license.
--> Ok, thanks!

>  I hope that the OSI board finds your license conformant.
--> Thank you.

>  It is still a step in the correct direction in my book.
--> Sorry, I don't quite understand this remark of yours.
      What is the intended meaning in (more) plain 
      english? (I'm not a native speaker and am easily
      confounded by implied meanings, expressions and
      the like - but am always willing to learn)

Kind regards, Abe.

license-discuss archive is at