Open CASCADE Technology Public License

[Matthew Flaschen]

Wilson, Andrew wrote:
> The OpenCASCADE developers would probably be well advised to consider
> using an existing OSI-approved license (at a first cut, LGPL, EPL, or
> CDDL seem
> to be close to what they want) rather than creating a non-reusable,
> one-of-a-kind license.

I agree.  It's actually a bit of unclear how strong they want the
copyleft, despite the confusing "For greater certainty" clause.  It
definitely seems to be a vanity license, and the first thing I would ask
if it were to be submitted, is the standard, "What is the most similar
license, and why can't you use that?".

They imply the answer's LGPL, but that's a little dubious, and they
don't shed much light on why they created the license.

Matt Flaschen