<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: Communication skills</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText95501 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>+1 on Simplified (2-clause) BSD license</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>-1 on name variants that include "FreeBSD". That FreeBSD uses this license and this license was known by some as the FreeBSD license can be clarified in the description of the license.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Actually, I wouldn't be adverse to "3-clause Permissive License" and "2-clause Permissive License" (3PL and 2PL). BSDs are not the only folks that might not want a competitor's name on the license they use. :)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>Out of curiosity, why doesn't the OSI have a basic permissive license that has all the "best" features of various BSD and MIT variants? Using an "OSI <n> Clause" permissive license seems neutral and reasonable.</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Zak Greant [mailto:zak.greant@gmail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thu 11/15/2007 4:07 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Chris Travers<BR><B>Cc:</B> License Discuss<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Communication skills<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>On 11/15/07, Chris Travers <chris.travers@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> Ok, it seems like the typical name for this license is "The 2-clase<BR>> BSD License."<BR>><BR>> We are likely to run into confusion over the names like "New BSD License."<BR>><BR>> Maybe we should rename the licenses as followes:<BR>> The New (3-clause) BSD License<BR>> The Simplified (2-clause) BSD License<BR><BR>+1<BR><BR>People get confused about this often enough to warrant clarification in the name<BR><BR>--<BR>Cheers!<BR>--zak<BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>