OSI Certification Process

[Bruce Perens]

From: Mark Wells <mark at pc-intouch.com>
> I've made this argument before.  Bruce said that if anyone actually
> submitted $PATHOLOGICAL_LICENSE that exploits $OSD_LOOPHOLE[$n], he'd
> refuse to certify it.

The OSD board makes certification decisions, not me. I can only make
recommendations. So far, they seem to have followed them, but they are
not bound to.

> What this actually means is that the OSD is much bigger and more complex
> than it looks

Not really. It's pretty simple to determine if something is outside of the
spirit of the OSD. For example, a particular proposed license required that
you pass a validation suite that checksummed the source code and rejected it
if it had been modified. The OSD doesn't say that you can're require a
validation suite, but it does say that you can't prohibit modification, and
that was a prohibition on modification.

	Thanks

	Bruce