QuantLib License 1.0 submitted for OSD branding

[Karsten M. Self]

on Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 06:49:42PM -0800, David Johnson (david at usermode.org) wrote:
> On Friday 11 January 2002 02:04 am, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> 
> > > There is no need to. It now follows the approved BSD license. In my
> > > *layman* opinion, you have met all the requirements for OSI
> > > certification.
> >
> > In _my_ lay opinion, any language change must be approved, but the
> > approval should be trivial.
> 
> From the BSD license at OSI: "The following is a BSD license template.
> To generate your own license, change the values of OWNER, ORGANIZATION
> and YEAR from their original values as given here, and substitute your
> own."
> 
> From what I can see, that's all the QuantLib license did. This creates
> a new license, but it's a new license for the software, not
> necessarily a new license that needs approval.
> 
> Otherwise, *everyone* that uses the BSD license needs to acquire
> separate OSI approval for their software.

Thanks, I'd missed that.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?              Home of the brave
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/                    Land of the free
We freed Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org
Geek for Hire                      http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20020111/1597636f/attachment.sig>