[License-discuss] what would de-listing of licenses look like?

Luis Villa luis at tieguy.org
Mon Mar 11 02:17:49 UTC 2013

On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Karl Fogel <kfogel at red-bean.com> wrote:
> Engel Nyst <engel.nyst at gmail.com> writes:
>>Thank you for taking it into account.
>>I've put together very roughly a wiki page for a draft proposal of how the
>>process could, perhaps, look like. The reason is that an actual
>>prototype of what is being discussed might help a constructive
>>discussion and give a better view of what is being proposed.
>>I apologize if that is an unsuitable action. Please feel free to remove it
>>in that case.
> Not at all -- this is *exactly* what the wiki is for!  As long as a page
> doesn't misrepresent itself as an official position of the OSI (and
> yours doesn't), it's fine & indeed welcome.

What's the state of robots.txt and the wiki? If this page will be
showing up in search results, I'd like it to slightly clearly identify
itself as a brainstorm that is not endorsed/approved.

I'd also like to reemphasize that I think this is a can of worms that
I personally don't think we have the focus/organization to tackle
effectively yet.  I haven't seen anything in this thread that changes
my mind on that yet.


>>On 3/7/13, Richard Fontana <fontana at sharpeleven.org> wrote:
>>> In my view, Bruce's justification 2 is the only justification: the
>>> license does not comply with the OSD and was accepted in error.
>>> I don't believe it is practical for the OSI to assess Bruce's
>>> justification 1. As for Bruce's justification 3, I think the OSI does
>>> enough here in its efforts to classify already-approved licenses.
>>> I certainly agree with Bruce that de-listing cannot be for political
>>> reasons. The rationale must be somehow grounded in the OSD, much like
>>> approval of licenses.
>>>> I think you need to have a committee review a proposal to de-list, with
>>>> arguments from the submitter regarding the problems in the license,
>>> I agree with that.
>>I've intended the draft mostly on the basis of existing approval process,
>>and the discussion here, but it surely contains many inappropriate and
>>rough points. Please, shut it down or change it, as you see fit.
>>License-discuss mailing list
>>License-discuss at opensource.org
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss

More information about the License-discuss mailing list