newsforge story
Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
rod at cyberspaces.org
Thu Sep 6 10:28:27 UTC 2001
These proposals sound lke a great idea!
Rod
Rod Dixon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sambc at nights.force9.co.uk [mailto:sambc at nights.force9.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:30 AM
> To: license-discuss at opensource.org
> Cc: osi at opensource.org
> Subject: RE: newsforge story
>
>
>
> I would like to pick up on a couple of points to
> this list, and to the OSI:
>
> "Board member Russ Nelson says that people who
> are complaining should put forth more effort to
> help the board by fulfilling the purpose of the
> license-discuss list: to discuss the merits of
> submissions and offer suggestions to the
> board. "I submitted three licenses on 8/31 for
> review to the license-discuss mailing list. Has
> anybody reviewed them?" "
>
> I never saw them - wether this is a fault at my
> end or yours remains to be seen. However, as it
> seems that others have looked in the archive and
> not found such emails I am puzzled. However, I
> must also reiterate by quoting my earlier
> suggestion (not credited to me in the article):
>
> "Members briefly bandied about a suggestion to
> form volunteer focus groups for each pending
> license; but there was no official public
> response from the OSI to the license-discuss
> list, and it seemed that was what the list was
> waiting for."
>
> I am still happy to do such things, and I am sure
> others are. A nice three tiered structure, with
> an hourglass shape (or diamond depending on how
> you drraw the diagram):
>
> 1) License-Discuss mailing list. Casual public
> discussion of pros and cons of licenses, and
> public opinion of their fitting the OSD
>
> 2) A set of smaller focus groups, handling one
> license at a time, and reviewing license-discuss
> feedback. Possibly with seperate mailing lists,
> and only 3-5 members. focus1 thru
> focus3 at opensource.org, for example. This would
> also allow the board and focus groups to suggest
> a small number of licenses for license-discuss to
> look at at one time.
>
> 3) The board, taking the reports of the focus
> groups. The focus groups will already have
> digested the views aired on license-discuss.
>
> Now I am happy to do work implementing this and
> working with it once it is implemented. Can we
> have a reply from the board as to this
> possibility?
>
> Finally, I would like to respond to the
> correspondace quoted in the article:
>
> "So okay, my feeling is to write these folks off
> as whingers. My opinion is subject to change, but
> first I want to see some discussion about the
> submitted licenses." - Russ Nelson
>
> Could this be clarified who it is applied to? No
> names need be mentioned, but what sort of
> proportion of the license-discuss list are we
> talking? A few real whingers? The whole list?
> Anyone who says anything negative? I would be
> itnerested to know, especially to figure out if
> it is likely that I am included, making
> contructive criticism as I have.
>
>
> Sam Barnett-Cormack
>
> >For those that haven't seen, NewsForge is carrying a none-to-flattering
> >story of the discussion on this list these past couple of weeks:
> >http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=3D01/09/04/1615251
>
> --
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
>
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list