Subject: License Committee Report for July 2007
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.licenses.open-source.general
Date: 2007-07-23 20:05:35 GMT (1 year, 49 weeks, 4 days and 34 minutes ago)
Expires: This article expires on 2007-08-06
I'm the chair of the license approval committee. This is my report for the current set of licenses under discussion. Title: Open Source Hardware License Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:12911:200707:jmkojcilhopeddgknmdj Revised here: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:12941:200707:jmkojcilhopeddgknmdj License: In the submission Comments: No consensus on license-discuss that OSI should be in the business of Open Source Hardware. Recommend: more discussion, with some direction from the board. Is this a direction that OSI should go in? And, even if we do, is a license particular to hardware needed? -- Title: Common Public Attribution License (CPAL) Submission: http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:12849:200706:pdjppaipccgjbdgekdna License: in the submission Comments: Andrew Oliver: Tomorrows software will include Socialtext at the bottom of the stack of a much larger aggregation of software. Rick Moen: Let's be tolerant of licence-created problem scenarios that seem, at best, on the far end of "unlikely to actually occur". Recommend: I think the board is on its own on this one. My personal recommendation (as a board member, not the chair) is to approve the license and see if it achieves the Open Source effect. The APL was not a widely used license, I suspect because of its complexity. Let's give attribution requirements another chance in a simpler license. If such a licensed software does not achieve the Open Source effect, it will put the issue to rest. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com | People have strong opinions Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | about economics even though 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 | they've never studied it. Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog | Curious how that is!