[License-review] License Committee Report - January 2017

Richard Fontana fontana at opensource.org
Mon Jan 9 17:00:47 UTC 2017

On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 08:38:24AM -0800, Josh berkus wrote:
> > The license submitter himself or herself did not submit the license
> > for legacy approval. Resubmission for legacy approval is a possibility
> > (though I am not sure if legacy approval is really an appropriate
> > category here -- I don't think this was really explored thoroughly; my
> > sense is this license would not fit the intended use of the legacy
> > approval category).
> I think we need to introduce that topic.  I don't know if you missed it,
> but this license is *already being used* for an assortment of
> Chinese-language projects with substantial numbers of users.  So if
> there's any way to do legacy approval, I think we should.

I guess the basic issue is how much of a lower standard should we
apply to legacy approval licenses. Clearly the license still has to be
considered to conform to the OSD.


More information about the License-review mailing list