[License-review] Approval request for ZENTAO PUBLIC LICENSE

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

I suggest you look at 开源社 http://www.kaiyuanshe.cn.

There are nuances to open source for every culture and you may find the answers you are looking for there.  As an affiliate member of the OSI the 开源社 community can probably best help you craft or find the license you need for the chinese open source environment.  It may be that the open source community in China already has a license that you can use.  If you use their open source license resolver the first option is to decide whether or not you only want to consider OSI approved licenses.  Another option is for “enhanced attribution” which may or may not be what we consider badgeware (sorry, I don’t read Chinese) that does what you want ZPL to do.

As it stands I do not believe that the ZenTao Public License would pass OSI approval.  It may be sufficient for you to have a 开源社 approved license (if they do such a thing) and ZPL may be considered 开源软件 as understood by the open source community in China.  The license probably also reads better in Chinese as opposed to the English translation.

Here we would call it shared source or badgeware.

From: License-review <license-review-bounces at opensource.org<mailto:license-review-bounces at opensource.org>> on behalf of Fei Teng <feiteng854 at gmail.com<mailto:feiteng854 at gmail.com>>
Reply-To: OSI License Review <license-review at opensource.org<mailto:license-review at opensource.org>>
Date: Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 2:45 AM
To: OSI License Review <license-review at opensource.org<mailto:license-review at opensource.org>>
Subject: [License-review] Approval request for ZENTAO PUBLIC LICENSE

As time goes by, everything is changing and changed. Different situation requires different license. Changes might happen to badgeware license in the future.

In China, a lot of developers who love open source eventually stopped updating their software because of other developers' violation of the common rules and disrespect the open source spirit.  If this keeps happening, it is harmful to the whip open source community.

Is it to follow all the old rules which is detrimental to open source spirit more important? Or to take actions to protect open source spirit more important?




On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Josh berkus <josh at postgresql.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','josh at postgresql.org');>> wrote:
On 06/20/2016 08:29 PM, Fei Teng wrote:
> 3. A lot of end users removed the badge of our product
> 4. A lot of developers who develop based on our product removed the
> badge of our product and they do NOT share their code with us

I thought we weren't approving any badgeware licenses?  If that's the
case, why are we still talking to Fei Teng?

--Josh Berkus
_______________________________________________
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/20160623/cdd16b51/attachment.html>