[License-review] License-review Digest, Vol 59, Issue 2

[Wendell Nicolas]

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:00 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
>         https://lists.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. License committee report - August 2017 (Richard Fontana)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2017 18:07:37 -0400
> From: Richard Fontana <fontana at opensource.org>
> To: license-review at opensource.org
> Subject: [License-review] License committee report - August 2017
> Message-ID: <20170806220737.GA2673 at clifford.lan>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Reference is made to the previous report
> (https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-
> July/003056.html).
> No updates to submitted licenses still under consideration apart from
> what is said here.
>
> Eclipse Public License version 2.0
> ==================================
>
> Submission:
> https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-
> June/003048.html
>
> Comments: No feedback from the list on EPL 2.0 in the past month.
>
> Recommendation: Approval, unless someone raises an objection over the
> next few days.
>
> Hooyami License Version 1.0
> ===========================
>
> Submission: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-
> July/003058.html
> and see the followup from the submitter:
> https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2017-
> July/003065.html
>
> Comments: Reaction has been negative, both on textual clarity and
> proliferation grounds.
>
> Recommendation: No action at this time, but I encourage the submitter
> to withdraw the submission in its current form and consider using an
> existing OSI-approved license, such as the MIT license.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
> https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of License-review Digest, Vol 59, Issue 2
> *********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20170807/4f7890fa/attachment.html>