Legacy approval request - The PostgreSQL Licence

[Tom "spot" Callaway]

On 11/26/2009 05:45 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> <PRODUCT>
> 
> Copyright (c) <YEAR>, <ORGANISATION>
> 
> Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> documentation for any purpose, without fee, and without a written
> agreement is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice
> and this paragraph and the following two paragraphs appear in all
> copies.
> 
> IN NO EVENT SHALL <ORGANISATION> BE LIABLE TO ANY PARTY FOR DIRECT,
> INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING
> LOST PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE AND ITS
> DOCUMENTATION, EVEN IF <ORGANISATION> HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
> 
> <ORGANISATION> SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT
> NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS
> FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE SOFTWARE PROVIDED HEREUNDER IS ON AN "AS
> IS" BASIS, AND <ORGANISATION> HAS NO OBLIGATIONS TO PROVIDE
> MAINTENANCE, SUPPORT, UPDATES, ENHANCEMENTS, OR MODIFICATIONS.

For what it is worth, I'd like to reiterate that this is functionally
identical to MIT (X11), except that it is slightly less permissive (does
not permit sublicensing).

My only concern with approving this as a distinct license separate from
MIT is that Fedora is tracking 26 other variants which are all
functionally identical to the MIT license as approved by OSI, but have
slightly different wording. If each of these licenses is approved and
labeled separately, we will be encouraging rather significant license
proliferation.

~spot