[License-discuss] [License-review] Evolving the License Review process for OSI

Richard Fontana rfontana at redhat.com
Mon Jun 3 01:49:15 UTC 2019

On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 12:03 PM Luis Villa <luis at lu.is> wrote:
> Where there's been a substantial point made, I think the answer is probably yes - a concise and board-endorsed summary of the CC0 withdrawal, for example, would have been repeatedly useful to be able to point at over the years.

There is a statement about the CC0 withdrawal in an OSI FAQ, which
Nigel has argued (convincingly I think) is misleading and inaccurate.
It just shows the difficulty in trying to summarize a license
submission withdrawal, which was not an OSI decision and at least IMO
can't fairly be described as a "decision" of license-review, or the
then-semi-fictional License Committee. Chris Webber actually gave a
pretty candid explanation for the withdrawal
but I am not sure what value a summary of that explanation would have
for people trying to understand how OSI itself makes decisions. I
suspect OSI would have approved CC0 if, er, someone hadn't
inconveniently brought up the whole patent issue.


More information about the License-discuss mailing list