BSD and MIT license "compliance" with the MS-PL
matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Sun Apr 19 03:03:22 UTC 2009
Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> An existing project can't change their license in this way
> without excessive drama and I don't think Theo would be inclined to
> go this route anyway.
Yes, but it would be easy to apply Ms-PL to new BSD code.
> I'm going to guess that most folks pick licenses based on the
> licenses of projects they've worked on or used more than anything
That's certainly one important factor, but not the only one.
>> If they wanted a license like this, they would have asked for it
>> long ago. But they didn't, because it goes against their core
>> principles. Perhaps instead of vague implications, you could
>> suggest a licensor that wanted this but was too dull to ask, and is
>> also irrationally scared of the MS name.
> It's a permissive open source license approved by the OSI. In what
> way does it go against our core principles?
I didn't say that. It's clearly compliant with OSD's principles. I
said it goes against the core principles of /the permissive community/.
Because my belief is
> that the core principle for permissive license users is to write
> (hopefully good) code that other folks use and skip the politics,
> manifestos and drama as much as (humanly) possible.
I don't agree that the permissive community is apolitical. They just
have different politics, which is fine.
More information about the License-discuss