BSD and MIT license "compliance" with the MS-PL

Matthew Flaschen matthew.flaschen at
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
> else.

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.

Matt Flaschen

More information about the License-discuss mailing list