Richard Fontana wrote at 21:49 (EDT) on Monday:
I've become more skeptical of the value of additional permissions
'exceptions' as they were called in the pre-GPLv3 era) because of the
complexity cost they add to a given licensing situation.
To argue against additional permissions is effectively to argue against
weak copyleft. Are you saying there should be no weak copyleft? (I'm
not trolling; I'm asking a philosophical question: particularly given
that you're the author of LGPLv3 as an exception set to GPLv3.)
A suitable integral weak copyleft variety of AGPL presumably could
have been applied to stet such that the clever notice wouldn't have
been necessary. (I'm not sure if the notice even *was* necessary, but
I don't remember much about how stet and RT fit together.)
But... but... there's no philosophical difference between a weak
copyleft and an additional-permission set. They are the same thing!