BSD and MIT license "compliance" with the MS-PL
matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Sun Apr 19 03:04:15 UTC 2009
Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
>> Actually, it's quite easy to argue that it doesn't preserve source
>> availability. A distributes alpha version of Foo under MS-PL. B
>> makes FooBar derivative, which becomes fanatically popular, and no
>> version of FooBar's source is ever released. Source availability
>> is denied for almost every user of a Foo derivative.
> This is the equivalent of saying that BSD is not an open source
> license because Foo is BSD and no version of FooBar's source is ever
I don't understand what you're saying. Neither BSD nor MS-PL preserve
source availability. Both BSD and MS-PL are free and open source.
More information about the License-discuss