YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?)

[Steve Lhomme]

>> So people should come with newer licenses based on years of
>> experience. That's why it would be VERY bad if the OSI never certified
>> a new license anymore.

>I'm not suggesting that, and I hope you're not insinuating that I am.

Nope, but in a more generalisation that could mean that. (it's the
mathematical way of thinking at the extremes)

>However, the OSI should approve new licenses only with extreme prejudice
>and deliberation.  A slow, cumbersome, inefficient, deliberative process
>that drives most comers to abandon their attempts at novel license
>authoring is fine by me.

So it's still unclear what is the OSI for in this case. Are they here to say
license A is fully compliant but since it's too close to license B, we don't
dare to certify it ? Maybe the "commitee" (is there something like that ?)
don't see the point of having something close but having one difference,
while other people might consider it as a big improvement... Is the OSI
there to judge what a license is worth ? If so they should divide the OSI in
2 parts : the neutral/approval part, and the political/judging part... I
think most people need the 1st part to work or use.

(btw, why are you email contents MIME txt attachements ?)


--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3