[CAVO] Link to SF - LAFCO open source voting draft

[Brent Turner]

So the CAVO preference of GPLv3 should be expressed to SF / LAFCO for
inclusion on their revision ?   Perhaps you can send that note or give
direction

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen at rosenlaw.com>
wrote:

> Brent Turner wrote:
>
> > My understanding is GPLv3 is the CAVO preference from OSI standards..
>
>
>
> Yes, for reasons relating to reassurance that all derivative works will be
> acceptable for voting around the world. The "strength" and "popularity" of
> the GPLv3 make it a good license for universal voting software.
>
>
>
> But that doesn't mean that the GPLv3 must be the only open source license
> used for free software.
>
>
>
> ALL OSI-approved licenses are open source. Other licenses are not.
>
>
>
> /Larry
>
>
>
> Lawrence Rosen
>
> Rosenlaw & Einschlag (www.rosenlaw.com)
>
> 3001 King Ranch Rd., Ukiah, CA 95482
>
> Cell: 707-478-8932
>
> LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/D9CWhD
>
>
>
> *From:* Brent Turner [mailto:turnerbrentm at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:08 AM
> *To:* Patrick Masson; CAVO
> *Subject:* Re: [CAVO] Link to SF - LAFCO open source voting draft
>
>
>
> My understanding is GPLv3 is the CAVO preference from OSI standards..
>
>
>
> If this is correct then perhaps others here should apprise LAFCO so as to
> clarify the best direction for SF
>
>
>
> Those attempting to insert confusion via non open source " sound-alike "
> code/ licenses should be anticipated.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Patrick Masson <masson at opensource.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 08:15 -0700, Brian J. Fox wrote:
>
> 1. Absolutely he meant “carrying an”
>
> :-)
>
> 2. If we are dedicated to the GPLv3 we should be explicit about it, and
> not allow any OSI license — OR we should allow any OSI license on or before
> date TODAY if we are comfortable with that.
>
> I'll leave the discussions as to which open source license CAVO prefers to
> CAVO. My point was only to ensure that the scope of open source software
> licenses was understood. In addition, it is important to note the OSI's
> historical role and interests around both copy left and permissive
> licenses. We obviously have an interest in promoting this broader
> perspective.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CAVO mailing list
> CAVO at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cavo
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CAVO mailing list
> CAVO at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cavo
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/cavo_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20150520/4f52cd0f/attachment.html>