[License-discuss] Improvement to the License-Review Process

[Josh Berkus]

On 8/25/20 1:51 PM, Andrew DeMarsh wrote:
> Demonstrate that at least x projects, which are not related to each
> other, either currently use the license, or will utilise it, if the
> license is accepted as being "Open Source". Whilst "x" is an arbitrary
> number, the idea is that by being used, there is a demonstrated real
> world use with professional intent for a usable OSI license which fills
> a previously unaddressed need with the OSI approved licence range.

FWIW, *most* license submitters have done exactly this. When they don't,
it's usually the first question asked, and I don't know that we've
passed a license that didn't have at least one substantial project
behind it in the last 10 years.  So this seems like a solved problem,
unless we're proposing raising the bar to exclude startup projects.

I would support requiring submitters to identify themselves, although
I'd like to include in that identifications that might be internet-based
rather than government-issued (e.g. "I'm 'onehacker' on Gitlab, you can
see my projects here").

-- 
Josh Berkus