[License-review] License-review Digest, Vol 9, Issue 1

[Timothy Deters]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:00 AM,  <license-review-request at opensource.org> wrote:
> Send License-review mailing list submissions to
>         license-review at opensource.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         license-review-request at opensource.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         license-review-owner at opensource.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of License-review digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Legacy Approval: APL AROS Public License. (Timothy Deters)
>    2. Re: Legacy Approval: APL AROS Public License. (Richard Fontana)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:01:32 -0400
> From: Timothy Deters <tdeters at gmail.com>
> To: license-review at opensource.org
> Subject: [License-review] Legacy Approval: APL AROS Public License.
> Message-ID:
>         <CALAU24rOjt6gvxhdJYNnzyX2NBpOxKVa7wB-ygmOMof5dSY7rw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> http://aros.sourceforge.net/license.html
>
> Proliferation Category:   Licenses that are popular and widely used or
> with strong communities
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:22:21 -0400
> From: Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com>
> To: license-review at opensource.org
> Subject: Re: [License-review] Legacy Approval: APL AROS Public
>         License.
> Message-ID: <20120726022221.GA11582 at redhat.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:01:32AM -0400, Timothy Deters wrote:
>> http://aros.sourceforge.net/license.html
>>
>> Proliferation Category:   Licenses that are popular and widely used or
>> with strong communities
>
> Is this any different from MPL 1.1 other than in branding? I see that
> the right to designate new versions of the license is given to the
> 'AROS development team'. Why not have the AROS development team
> designate MPL 2.0 as the successor license to AROS PL 1.1?
>
> - Richard
>
>
> --
> Richard Fontana
> Red Hat, Inc.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>
>
> End of License-review Digest, Vol 9, Issue 1
> ********************************************

The main reason is currently the "AROS Development Team" cannot seem
to agree on who gets to make that decision.   We would like for now
while we work out that aspect(Currently the idea is to form an elected
board for that purpose).  Get recognized so that we don't miss
opportunities in the future to be picked up and supported by companies
who will only deal in OSI recognized Licensed code.

Tim