approved licenses web page not being updated
Joseph M. Reagle Jr.
reagle at w3.org
Wed Aug 1 21:56:52 UTC 2001
At 14:32 8/1/2001, David Johnson wrote:
>Back when I joined this list, it was my impression that it was only for
>unofficial public discussion of licenses, and *not* meant to be any part of
>an approval process.
"OSI has also established a mailing list to review licenses submitted to
license-approval at opensource.org."
> My assumption at that time, which still holds, is that
>the OSI board has their own discussions during the approval phase.
"6. At the same time, we will monitor the license-discuss list and work
with you to resolve any problems uncovered in public comment.
8. Once we are assured that the license conforms to the
Open Source Definition and has received thorough discussion on
license-discuss or by other reviewers, and there are no remaining issues
that we judge significant, we will notify you that the license has been
approved, copy it to our website, and add it to the list below."
(Note that I'm excerpting from a resource which is not dated, but seems to
be supercede  which my original request complied with.)
On the question of this effort being a voluntary one, there are useful work
rules that make any type of work (voluntary or paid) easier for all
involved. For instance, date all your pages (so people can figure how dated
they are), sign all your pages (so people know who to contact with
questions), accurately reflect their status (abusing peoples' expectations
is the real problem , if there is no commitment to respond to a request,
the page should say so).
5. A commitment is an agreement by an entity that is accountable. As
stated, an action item commitment is associated with a name,
not "someone" (never gets done) or "one of them" (not very fair to
the other people).
6. I work to meet my commitments, if I can't I will say so as soon
as I know. Not being able to do something is fine, just say so.
Then one can re-prioritize, re-negotiate, or re-assign that
commitment. Letting something go to completion date and fail is
bad; it could've been discussed but now all dependencies are
Joseph Reagle Jr. http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle at w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/Signature
W3C XML Encryption Chair http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
More information about the License-discuss