RPL 1.5 discussion

[Scott Shattuck]

I'd like to second William's request and respectfully ask that the  
RPL 1.5 be summarily approved at the next board meeting.

Revisions to the RPL v1.1 (originally approved in November of 2002)  
were submitted in April of 2006, largely in response to objections  
raised by the FSF when they noted that the RPL was the only software  
license that was both OSI-approved and "non-free".

Unfortunately, no action was ever taken on that submission in spite  
of the fact that a) there was almost no license activity/mailing list  
traffic during that month or subsequent months, b) I sent email to  
several license-* groups asking about status, c) I sent email  
directly to the board's mailing list, d) I exchanged email with  
certain board members directly.

I got sick of trying and handed off to Bill. He re-submitted RPL  
revisions for approval in July of this year. Since over a year had  
passed with no action we decided to fine-tune the language in certain  
areas and chose to label it v1.5. Perhaps unsurprisingly there has  
been absolutely no action, discussion, or other commenting on that  
submission. Not one message -- unless you count our continued request  
that the board actually approve it since there has been no objection  
cited.

While I understand the board has been busy with the GPL/LGPL I'd  
hoped that the fact that the 1.3 submission had been effectively  
ignored that you'd have respected his request to approve it at the  
September meeting. Apparently a quick vote on a license with no  
objections would have taken too long. Ok, that was probably uncalled  
for, but seriously folks, what the hell?


ss



On Sep 11, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Chris DiBona wrote:

> Then I'll get reading :-) Thanks William.
>
> Chris
>
> On 9/11/07, William J. Edney <bedney at technicalpursuit.com> wrote:
>> Chris -
>>
>> Yes, it is our intent to deprecate 1.1.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> - Bill
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Chris DiBona wrote:
>>
>>> Hi William;
>>>
>>> Is it your intent to have 1.1 be put into a deprecated state?
>>>
>>> On 9/11/07, William J. Edney <bedney at technicalpursuit.com> wrote:
>>>>  All -
>>>>
>>>> On a completely different topic, I would like to open discussion
>>>> (if there
>>>> is any) on the Reciprocal Public License (RPL) version 1.5 upgrade,
>>>> submitted by myself to this list on July 24th, 2007:
>>>>
>>>> http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:
>>>> 13076:200707:kdcakaahmlnjkcfaaijd
>>>>
>>>> RPL version 1.1 was approved in November of 2002 and is currently
>>>> in use by
>>>> a number of organizations worldwide. This version of the license
>>>> makes a
>>>> number of changes as per suggestions from both these organizations
>>>> and the
>>>> FSF.
>>>>
>>>> If no one has any discussion points regarding this license, then I
>>>> would
>>>> respectfully request that this license be considered for approval
>>>> at the
>>>> next board meeting.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks very much.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> William J. Edney
>>>> bedney at technicalpursuit.com
>>>> 314.757.9200
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
>>> Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
>>> Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
> Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
> Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com