The Python licensing situation.

[Karl Fogel]

"Lindberg, Van" <Van.Lindberg at haynesboone.com> writes:
>> In [3] below, Van proposes a upgrade to the CNRI portion of the
>> Python-2.0 license (so this would be in Python-2.1).  The changes are
>> mainly about making it GPL-compatible.  They're actually a bit
>> interesting, but I don't want to go into them here, because there's a
>> larger question first:
>> 
>> In http://opensource.org/licenses/Python-2.0, OSI *already has* the
>> proposed CNRI 1.6.1 (GPL-compatible) text.  So it appears OSI has
>> already approved this, or else there is a clerical error.  Does anyone
>> know more about this?
>
> There *is* a clerical error - the version that was picked up and
> mirrored was the beta version of the license. This proposal is to 1)
> fix the clerical error, and 2) update the naming so that it is
> unambiguous.

So the version that was picked up and posted by OSI is one that PSF had
never officially released, and that now PSF is attempting to fix the
situation by just releasing it?

I'm still not clear on whether OSI actually approved the unreleased
beta, or whether we approved something else but then pasted the wrong
(unapproved) text into our own site's page.  I realize that's a question
more for OSI people to answer, but if you happen to know the answer,
Van, please let me know.

Thanks,
-Karl