[License-review] For Approval: Scripting Free Software License, Version 1.3.6 (S-FSL v1.3.6)

Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd.de
Mon Nov 18 19:31:13 UTC 2013


Elmar Stellnberger dixit:

> I would recommend getting your license
> OSI[1] approved,

> So he thinks the license is or could be OSI compliant. Otherwise
> he would not need to write that.

I think you misread that: he didn’t suggest it because he thought
your licence would fit, since it clearly doesn’t (as is) but as a
generic first step, because an OSI approved licence is, in almost
all cases, also DFSG free (no surprise given history). This isn’t
unambiguous, especially to people who aren’t English native spea‐
kers, but I think my reading is the most sound one. (Also, Debian
is not an entity – in Debian, every developer talks for himself –
so something paultag wrote has no bearing on something written by
algernon, unless they explicitly refer each other.

Anyway, your stated goals are contrary to Open Source, which is a
reason I haven’t replied any more either (you seem to want to not
fix the real problems but pile bad wording on top of bad wording,
and lose people in discussion, too). I suggest you either use one
of the existing proper OSS licences or, frankly, go away. (I am a
BSD developer, so I’m entitled to be rude like that.) Considering
all this discussion, I’d personally not touch your software, even
if your licence *were* OSI approved. There is precedent e.g. with
J�rg Schilling wrt. upstream having their… own… idea about licen‐
cing.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
„Also irgendwie hast du IMMER recht. Hier zuckelte gerade ein Triebwagen mit
der Aufschrift "Ostdeutsche Eisenbahn" durch Wuppertal. Ich glaubs machmal
nicht…“						-- Natureshadow, per SMS
„Hilf mir mal grad beim Denken“			-- Natureshadow, IRL, 2x



More information about the License-review mailing list