RE: License

["John Passaniti" <jpass@...>]

> I agree with Reuben.  As near as I can tell, the
> other licenses used for open source scripting 
> don't seem to include a no language change clause.

Can someone please explain to me why this is even an issue?

When I was first evaluating Lua as the scripting language for a product
I was working on, I read the license.  It took a minute.  It was clearly
written and didn't require me to go to some archive of standard licenses
where I must wade through endless text-- and often text that is really
disguised essays on free and open source software.

I'm all for standards where there is a benefit that can be objectively
measured.  In the case of the Lua license, I see no benefit in adopting
someone else's license.  Before that is done, I'd like those who see the
need for a "standard" license to state the objective benefits.