andrew.wilson at intel.com
Wed Sep 14 18:15:03 UTC 2005
Alex Bligh wrote:
> I think we've already been around the "optional" argument,
> and concluded that an OVPL with an optional 3.3 is pointless.
However, even an anti-license-proliferation "hawk" such as myself
would say that such an OVPL which combined a license with an optional
contributor's agreement in a single instrument would be novel
and not duplicative.
Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the License-discuss