Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You may have a good point here. Perhaps we want a Perl Manifesto that
> lays out our base goals in plain English, separate from any licensing
> scheme. At the least, it could serve as documentation for *why* Perl
is
> dual-licensed, since this keeps coming up.
I think that "charter" would be more palatable than "manifesto", although
I won't lose the sentiment in semantics. I've been thinking the same
thing, and agree entirely. Whereas the license could use some tightening
up to allow legal enforcement of rights and restrictions, such a charter
could allow for public censure to serve the same purpose as seeking legal
remedy when Larry's hands are otherwise tied.
However, there's a fly in the ointment. In current circumstances, Larry's
hands may well be tied to so much as consider an "official" charter of
this nature, much less bless it. If this turns out to be so, what do we
do?
p
