[License-discuss] proposal to revise and slightly reorganize the OSI licensing pages

[Lawrence Rosen]

Gervase Markham wrote:

I'd add that, given that the MPL 2 is used by both Mozilla and LibreOffice,
two very substantial projects, I'd say it pretty much fits the criteria on
its own merits even without support from the large body of MPL 1.1+ software
out there.

 

I fully agree with the general opinion here that MPL 2 is an important and
widely-used license. I meant no disrespect to that or any other licenses
when complaining about the list of "popular" licenses on the OSI website.

 

However, what are the "criteria" to which you refer so that we can judge
other licenses by the same criteria?

 

/Larry

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Gervase Markham [mailto:gerv-gmane at gerv.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 8:06 AM
To: license-discuss at opensource.org
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] proposal to revise and slightly reorganize
the OSI licensing pages

 

On 05/06/12 17:59, Mike Milinkovich wrote:

> I don't think that the inclusion of MPL 2.0 in any way a bad decision.

> My assumption is that the Steward of the MPL requested that all 

> significant references to the the MPL be modified to point to the new 

> version. Similarly, the original list included both the CPL and the EPL.

> When the CPL was deprecated in favour of the EPL, the CPL was deleted 

> from the list.

 

I'd add that, given that the MPL 2 is used by both Mozilla and LibreOffice,
two very substantial projects, I'd say it pretty much fits the criteria on
its own merits even without support from the large body of MPL 1.1+ software
out there.

 

Gerv

 

_______________________________________________

License-discuss mailing list

 <mailto:License-discuss at opensource.org> License-discuss at opensource.org

 <http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss>
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120611/393281a5/attachment.html>