<html><body><div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000"><div>Hi Max,</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>I came around this thread and realized that the situation of the Python licenses on spdx.org and on the OSI site is quite a mess.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>I'm still in the process of sorting, but a current breakdown:</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><div>As far as I can see, the Python license on the OSI site (<a href="https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0">https://opensource.org/license/Python-2.0</a>) was never used in any Python release.</div><div>It is a strange bastard of the license texts of Python 2.5, but with the CNRI license part (for Python 1.6.1) *replaced* with an very early draft of the license (from Python 1.6 beta1), which was never used in any public release.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>I'm pretty sure this license text is a copy & paste error. The same problem also affects the "Python-2.0" license on SPDX (<a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.html" data-mce-href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.html">https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.html</a>).</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>The Python 2.5 license (<a href="https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5/license/" data-mce-href="https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5/license/">https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5/license/</a>) includes the CNRI OPEN SOURCE LICENSE AGREEMENT (for Python 1.6).</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>I don't know about the implications, but the CNRI license agreement for Python 1.6 beta1 differed significantly from the license for 1.6.1. I'm pretty sure that the license for </div><div>1.6b1 was not compatible with the GPL.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>It's very strange to see that a search for "CNRI OPEN SOURCE LICENSE AGREEMENT (for Python 1.6b1)" gives so many hits, if you know that this text was never included in any public Python release.</div></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>Conclusion: I think it's very reasonable to submit the current Python license for approval.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>More details:</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>Historically, the Python LICENSE file is a collection of different license agreements that cover different parts of the code. Also, until recently, the text of the license was updated for nearly every release (e.g. to append the year of the release). Only recently the PSF has adopted a scheme where the text of the license stays the same (still, the LICENSE file is updated).</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>So what the SPDX calls the "Python License 2.0.1" is in fact simply the license used in Python 2.0.1.</div><div>To make things more complicated, what SPDX calls the "Python License 2.0" is not the license used in Python 2.0, but the license used e.g. in Python 2.5.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>But for some reason, the section with the CNRI license agreement for Python 1.6 was replaced with the CNRI license agreement used in Python 1.6 beta1.</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><div>Strange thing is that this beta1 release of 1.6 had license terms that were never before and never after used: The public release of Python 1.6 had a significantly different license and then again in Python 1.6.1 the license was changed again (to make it compatible with the GPL, again):</div><div>- License of Python 1.6b1: <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1011" data-mce-href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1011">http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1011</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>- License of Python 1.6: <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1012" data-mce-href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1012">http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1012</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>- License of Python 1.6.1: <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1013" data-mce-href="http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1013">http://hdl.handle.net/1895.22/1013</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div>Best regards,</div><div> Gregor Hoffleit</div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><hr id="zwchr" data-marker="__DIVIDER__"><div data-marker="__HEADERS__"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>Von: </b>"Max Mehl" <Max.Mehl@deutschebahn.com><br><b>An: </b>"license-discuss" <license-discuss@lists.opensource.org><br><b>Gesendet: </b>Freitag, 20. März 2026 17:18:29<br><b>Betreff: </b>Re: [License-discuss] Python-2.0.1 and CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible<br></blockquote></div><div data-marker="__QUOTED_TEXT__"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #1010FF;margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Hi all,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Thanks for the additional comments. I\u2019ve met Deb (ED of PSF) in Berlin this week and she was fine with me submitting both licenses, provided I Cc her in the submission emails.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Consequently, I\u2019ve opened two separate threads on license-review@.</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Best,</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Max </div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container" style="color:inherit;background-color:inherit">
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr">
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="text-align:left;padding:3pt 0in 0in;border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb( 181 , 196 , 223 );font-family:'aptos';font-size:12pt;color:black">
<b>From: </b>License-discuss <license-discuss-bounces@lists.opensource.org> on behalf of McCoy Smith <mccoy@lexpan.law><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 17. March 2026 at 15:34<br>
<b>To: </b>license-discuss@lists.opensource.org <license-discuss@lists.opensource.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [License-discuss] Python-2.0.1 and CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible<br>
<br>
</div>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">Max:</p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">If you think the newer version of the Python license ought to be approved by the OSI, someone needs to submit it through the license approval process, described here:
<a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">Given that it sounds like 2.0.1 is now being used by Python, and 2.0 is only a legacy of older versions, I'd suggest that if submitted, at the same time 2.0 be "Voluntarily Retired" as have many other
licenses that have been superceded by newer versions (see the list here: <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded%2Cvoluntarily-retired" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded%2Cvoluntarily-retired</a>); if it is not, 2.0 will likely be tagged (if 2.0.1 is approved) as superseded, like these licenses:
<a href="https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded</a> Same comment for the newer CNRI license versus the old one.</p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">I would suggest that someone from the Python community (if you aren't one already) do the submission, if that result is indeed desired. The review process requirements are in the link above.</p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">*This is no commentary on the approvability of the 2.0.1. or new CNRI license, which I haven't read, but just a general comment on how the result you want might be accomplished.</p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">McCoy Smith</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/16/2026 5:46 PM, Pamela Chestek wrote:</div>
<blockquote>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">I don't see a reason. The OSI generally only reacts to requests for license approval, it doesn't generally approve licenses without them being submitted. I'm assuming it hasn't be approved just because
no one has asked for it before.</p>
<p class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing">Pam</p>
<div class="moz-signature">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
4641 Post St.<br>
Unit 4316<br>
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762<br>
+1 919-800-8033<br>
<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/6/2026 5:47 AM, Max Mehl wrote:</div>
<blockquote>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Hi everyone,</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
As requested by Nick, I would like point to an ongoing discussion on Python licenses, affecting both OSI's and SPDX\u2019s realms, and request OSI\u2019s approval of two licenses.</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
As you know, the licensing history of Python is quite complex, and the current license consists of multiple other licenses representing the long history and the different \u201cownerships\u201d of the project (CWI, CNRI, BeOpen, PSF).
<a href="https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2197" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
spdx/license-list-XML#2197</a> and an <a href="https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/topic/107252308" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
email to spdx-legal@</a> describe a bunch of intertwined problems around the identifiers of components of Python licenses. Recently, OSI fixed some of those already, thanks!</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Now, I wonder about the status of the license SPDX describes as <a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
Python-2.0.1</a>. IIRC, the main difference between <a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
Python-2.0</a> and Python-2.0.1 is in the CNRI part, making it GPL compatible (the \u201cVirginia clause\u201d). SPDX lists this updated sub-part as
<a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible</a>, a successor of <a href="https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
CNRI-Python</a>.</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Since Python 1.6.1 and 2.0.1, Python releases have been licensed under Python-2.0.1 (and recently additionally 0BSD for its documentation), while Python-2.0 has only been used for Python 1.6 and 2.0. So modern CPython releases would probably be best described
as being licensed under "Python-2.0.1 AND 0BSD". </div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
But OSI only approved Python-2.0 as an Open Source license, as well as the old CNRI-Python part. This is why I suggest OSI to approve
<b>Python-2.0.1</b> and <b>CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible</b> as Open Source licenses, and mark Python-2.0 and CNRI-Python as superseded. Is there any reason not to?</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Best,</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
Max </div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr;font-family:'aptos' , 'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb( 0 , 0 , 0 )">
<br>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature" style="color:inherit;background-color:inherit">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">-- </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><b>Max Mehl</b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Open Source / Supply Chain</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Enterprise-Team Chief Technology Office (CTO)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">DB Systel GmbH / Deutsche Bahn</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black">Schedule a meeting: <a href="https://cal.com/mxmehl" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:0px" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
cal.com/mxmehl</a></span><br data-mce-bogus="1"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm;font-family:'aptos' , sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<span style="color:black"><br>
</span></p>
</div>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr">
<br>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing"><br>
<a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260305" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">Pflichtangaben anzeigen</a><br>
<br>
Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: <a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz</a><br data-mce-bogus="1"></div>
<pre><div class="moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a>
</div></pre>
</blockquote>
<div class="ms-outlook-mobile-reference-message skipProofing" style="direction:ltr">
<br>
</div>
<pre><div class="moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a>
</div></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<br>
<a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260319" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">Pflichtangaben anzeigen</a><br>
<br>
Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: <a href="https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">
https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz</a>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.<br><br>License-discuss mailing list<br>License-discuss@lists.opensource.org<br>http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org<br></blockquote></div></div></body></html>