EPICS Open License (U.S. gov't DOE / ANL project).

[John Cowan]

Karl Fogel scripsit:

> Their license seems pretty open source-ish to me, at first glance,
> though it might be more obviously if the word "specified" were removed
> from clause 4(c).  

I think that means that it's not enough to say "Portions of the
software have been changed"; you must specify (to a reasonable degree
of granularity) which portions.  Such clauses are archaisms in modern
software development environments with diff tools and source-code control,
but they aren't (IMHO, IANAL, TINLA) against the OSD.

> Do we have any history of consideration of this license?  Should we
> invite them to submit it?  

We should, yes.

-- 
By Elbereth and Luthien the Fair, you shall     cowan at ccil.org
have neither the Ring nor me!  --Frodo          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan