[License-review] CeCILL license V2.1 for Approval

[Karl Fogel]

Patrick Moreau <patrick.moreau at inria.fr> writes:
>We wish to submit the CeCILL license v.2.1 for approval by OSI. An HTML version of the license in English can be found herewith attached. 
>
>[...]
>
>We remind everybody that we submitted the CeCILL license v.2.0 in 2005
>but our request had been rejected because of unclear source
>distribution language. You can find all the discussions from 2005 at

>http://osdir.com/ml/licenses.open-source.general/2005-06/threads.html
>and
>http://osdir.com/ml/licenses.open-source.general/2005-09/threads.html. 
>
>We have understood arguments and decided to write a modified version
>of the CeCILL license (v.2.1), notably in order to clarify the
>obligation to provide source code (articles 5.3.1 and 5.3.2). This is
>this modified version that we would like to submit today. 
>
>The three required sections for the submission of the CeCILL license
>v.2.1 are at the end of this message, as well as the analysis for the
>three criteria.
>
>The team who wrote CeCILL (composed of lawyers, software engineers and
>computer scientists) will welcome all your comments and answer your
>questions.

Thank you for the submission!  I apologize for our delay in responding.
We've had a very busy discussion recently about another submission, and
that took much of our attention.  However, that's winding down now, and
we can examine CeCILL 2.1.

Thank you also for the historical context around the 2005 submission of
version 2.0 -- that will help a lot.

Are you subscribed to the license-review@ list, or should we keep you
directly CC'd on discussion?

Best,
-Karl Fogel