Peter Van Eynde <pvaneynd@mailworks.org> wrote:
On 10/06/16 17:53, Michael McDonald wrote:
Whatâs the problem with the clause? Since itâs a ârequestâs completely optional. So essentially a no op.
"I am not a lawyer" and "English is not my native language", but for example the text "Send me a postcard if you like this software.", which to me sounds like an even more vague request, has been declared as problematic. As I understand it if the license were to use rfc2119 then there would be less of a problem, but standard English is too vague.
See also https://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html
But I personally wouldnât be changing someone elseâs license clauses without very explicit permission to do so. Iâd probably just put a note below the license documenting that the contact info is dead as of whatever date you tried.
Agreed, however as Stas noted the SBCL people just removed the clause as it is 'dead'. Adding a note would not help with the DFSG.
Have you tried sending email to ...@xerox.com ? I guess somebody could email Daniel Bobrow, he is still at PARC. Robert Swindells