[License-review] Octopus License

[dialog purpose]

It is different from MIT, ISC, BSD, UoI/NCSA Open Source License

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:38 PM, dialog purpose <dialogpurpose at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello :)
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Josh berkus <josh at postgresql.org> wrote:
>
>> On 12/22/2016 10:31 AM, dialog purpose wrote:
>> > Hello, my name is Barzi Maghdid Ahmad, I have an open-source which I
>> > want Open Source Initiative to approve it. It is based on Tcl/Tk
>> > license, but I solved many problems to make it conform to the Open
>> > Source Definition. I named it Octopus License. here is the license
>> template:
>>
>> So, can you explain why this license is needed when we have both the MIT
>> and two different BSD licenses?  The only substative difference I see is
>> the requirement to add a copyright notice in each file, which is hard to
>> regard as an improvement.
>>
>> Also, why "octopus"?
>> _______________________________________________
>> License-review mailing list
>> License-review at opensource.org
>> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20161222/5e21ddad/attachment.html>