MPL RC1 posted to license-review

[Karl Fogel]

Alexandre Terekhov <alexandre.terekhov at yahoo.de> writes:
>MPL RC1 confuses the term condition (as in "condition precedent") with
>the term covenant (as in "licensee's subsequent obligation/promised
>performance in exchange to the licensed permission/grant").  
>MPL RC1 drafter(s) should better go back to law school.

I have no comment on the substance of your observations, Alexandre, but
I will say one thing:

The tone of discussion on all public OSI lists must be civil.  No
insults, period, implied or otherwise.  Telling drafters they need to
"go back to law school" is simply out of bounds.  If you have a bug to
report, then just report the bug -- and when you catch a real one, all
sides will thank you for it.  There is never a need for ad hominem
comments.

If we have to switch this to a moderated list to enforce this policy, we
will, but I trust we won't need to.

By the way, as Luis pointed out, license-review@ is the right place for
followup, not license-discuss at .  If you can repost your observation
about "condition" vs "covenant" on license-review@, that would be great.

Thank you,
-Karl

>Von: Luis Villa <luis at tieguy.org>
>An: License Discuss <license-discuss at opensource.org>
>Gesendet: 18:09 Montag, 15.August 2011 
>Betreff: MPL RC1 posted to license-review
>
>FYI for those of you not on license-review - we've submitted MPL
>Release Candidate 1 for discussion to that list. Please join that list
>if you'd like to discuss there.
>
>Archival link for the submission for reference:
>
>http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?17:mss:1295:201108:jafembpjmbocaiaojhef
>
>Thanks-
>Luis