Communication skills

[Chris Travers]

On Nov 15, 2007 8:37 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at linpro.no> wrote:

> IIRC, the matter of the name of the license I did submit was brought
> up on license-discuss, and I pointed out that it is used by several
> projects, some of which are known for their animosity towards each
> other.  Naming the license after one of those projects would not be a
> smart move, especially when that project was not even the first to use
> it.

Sorry, but I really think this is not the right time for this sort of
decision.  I think analysis of politics in choosing names for licenses
is beyond the scope of this process.   Any decision will
offend/infuriate some people.

Naming licenses after projects or organizations has never been an
issue in the past.  After all the "New BSD" license is named after the
Berkeley Software Distribution project.  Furthermore one has to wonder
when projects are different from organizations.  What about the MIT
License?  The Microsoft * License?  Why should we do this now?

Here is my proposed solution:  Approve *the license* as the "FreeBSD
License (also called the Simplified BSD License)"

Any objections to this?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers