ernest.prabhakar at gmail.com
Tue Jul 1 23:08:03 UTC 2008
On Jul 1, 2008, at 2:18 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> I have some questions about a couple of licenses I ran across during a
> license review:
> - The Frontier Artistic License was apparently submitted but not
> approved (no surprise, its the exact same license with a few words
> changed). However, I didn't find anything about it in the archives.
> Can you rell me whether it was formally rejected, or whether the
> submission was just ignored, or discussed but not forwarded to the
This appears to have been submitted prior to September 2000:
I believe this is prior to license-discuss being the formal "license
review committee", which means we there is no public record of what
happened. If someone was interested, I would recommend re-submitting
> - Regarding the above, the author's web page about the license
> (<URL:http://www.spinwardstars.com/frontier/fal.html>) still
> the text "Submitted to OpenSource.org for Open Source Initiative
> certification", which I find a bit disingeniuous, especially if it
> was formally rejected. Perhaps a polite letter from the board would
> be in order.
Based on the available evidence, that seems like a factual statement.
> - The awful, awful SSLeay license: has it ever been submitted for
I don't see any records that it was:
Just one indirect mention:
> - The original SSH license: has it ever been submitted for approval?
> (I assume not)
I can't even find any Goggle Hits for it, except perhaps this one:
> - The ITU and IJG licenses: have they ever been submitted for
I've never heard of these. If you provide links to the original text,
we can try to find a match.
But, why all this interest in ancient history?
-- Ernie P.
More information about the License-discuss