[Fwd: [gnu.org #285277] Open Source Initiative Certification for GPL 3.0]
andre at cubit.co.za
Fri Apr 21 05:31:51 UTC 2006
On Friday 21 April 2006 01:55, Matthew Seth Flaschen forwarded,
Apparently on behalf of: "Dave Turner via RT" <licensing at fsf.org> :
<some snippage around here somewhere>
>> Will the FSF seek OSI certification
>> (http://www.opensource.org/docs/certification_mark.php#approval) upon
>> the release of GPL 3.0? It is a requirement that the license steward
>> (holder of copyright on the license document) initiate the process (if
>> the steward wishes the license to be OSI-certified).
>It's actually not a requirement that a license steward initiates the
>process, since GPLv2 is listed on their site, and FSF never requested
>If OSI wishes to become relevant, it will stop certifying licenses
>simply because someone makes a request, and start seriously working to
>stop license proliferation.
not everyone is the oss community agrees fully with the fsf philosophy.
the gpl was available as a license choice for many top oss projects but
yet was not selected by those developers. licensing freedom and choice
is important and imho the osi is the glue that holds it all together.
anti proliferation is stifling freedom and limiting choice, it seems lots is
about power and prescription and little about true freedom.
(are major players yet supporting the proposed gpl v3?)
should we only have the gpl and nothing else? is bsd style licensing true
is the gpl really "free" and does it impart true freedom?
Or is it actually restrictive and inhibits absolute freedom? who is to decide
which is better, true and absolute freedom or restrictive, prescriptive
freedom (because someone thinks it's good for the "world")?
i truly dislike the stabs that the fsf often takes at the osi both in public
and in private, sad that... because in truth both organisations have a
rightfull place in the software industry and they are not at opposing ends of
the spectrum and imho both are doing great and excellent work (thx btw :) )
only 1c (i'm sure someone else has at least a $)
More information about the License-discuss