For Approval: Open Source Software Alliance License

[Sean Chittenden]

[snip]
> > That's fine, but if a widget maker releases a piece of software
> > under the GPL, other widget makers won't care and won't look at
> > the resulting open sourced code.
> 
> In fact they do.  People who sell proprietary software are among the
> heaviest contributors to the open-source community.

While there is a basis for this claim, it isn't particularly helpful
to a discussion one way or another.

> > I'm trying to suggest that the GPL and BSD/MIT licenses don't fit
> > my needs as a business and I think the OSSAL is an adequate
> > alternative that suits my needs and the needs of others.
> 
> Your license is fine, once the ambiguities are squeezed out, and I
> recommend that the OSI approve it.

Are you apart of the approval process?  *doesn't remember reading that
part*

> I don't believe your advocacy is founded on sound argumentation,
> which is an entirely independent point.  This list discusses both.

Well, from what I can tell, any conclusion that isn't the GPL seems to
indicate a flaw in whoever's argumentation.  :)  -sc

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