For Approval: Transitive Grace Period Public Licence, v1.0
rick at linuxmafia.com
Wed Feb 18 02:46:20 UTC 2009
Quoting Christopher Schmidt (crschmidt at metacarta.com):
> I'm not sure how this is relevant to what I said?
Then, this is likely to be a short conversation.
> I said I release Open Source software, where the definition of "Open
> Source Software" is "software which is released under a license which
> is compliant with the Open Source Definition according to legal
In the case under discussion, there are significant problems with
claimed OSD compliance that have been cited upthread.
> This is understandable, but given that, I can't (personally) seriously
> accept that the definition of 'open source' should be limited to a set
> of licenses that are managed by OSI.
You seem to have missed (or decided for reasons of your own to ignore)
what I said, which was quite specific. Here it is again:
You would be making a grave mistake if you think that trying to call
something with even _arguable_ OSD-compliance problems "open source" is
in the interest of you or your firm.
More information about the License-review