MS-PL/GPL compatibility, was Re: For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License
chris.travers at gmail.com
Thu Aug 23 23:21:11 UTC 2007
On 8/23/07, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> Quoting Chris Travers (chris.travers at gmail.com):
> > I thought this was a list for discussing licenses in general.
> You would be quite mistaken.
Then may I make a sincere suggestion that the topic matters of the lists be
clearly stated on the opensource.org web site?
Otherwise it gives the very clear impression that this is about discussing
license matters in general as to the list archives as a whole, I might add.
I think that rules are best stated and applied fairly. If an analysis of
why the GPL v3 might be compatible with the MS-PL is not on permitted but a
discussion of knitting and religion (Quakerism) is, the appearance is
created that certain employers are granted extra lee-way in determining what
is on-topic for this community resource.
Furthermore, it would be very helpful to *add* a list for discussing license
compatibility, and so forth.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-discuss