[License-review] NOSA 2.0 - 'Up or Down' vote

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Wed Jan 11 18:48:14 UTC 2017

Quoting dialog purpose (dialogpurpose at gmail.com):

> No, I was wrong. I remembered that the license has simply does not say
> "you can recopyright it" and I remembered how much effort I made for
> the license. Octopus License is based on Tcl/Tk, so if Octopus has
> mistakes, then Tcl has also mistakes.

Not all of the existing OSI-certified licences are particularly
good.  Probably some shouldn't have been approved at all.  Errare
humanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum.

Also, one of the commonest mistakes on OSI's license-review and
license-discuss mailing lists is 'I borrowed passages from one or more
OSI-certified licence, so surely what results is a good licence.' This
has lead to trouble, time and again.

> But Octopus license fixed many technical mistakes (such as copyright
> format) by lawyers, and I am the one who paid a lot of money to those.

Sunk cost is such a heartbreak.

(As a point of clarification in case it was unclear, the Board and
License Review Chair speak for OSI.  I'm just a participating member of
the surrounding open source community.)

Please do enjoy your Atlassian experience.  I particularly admire Jira,
except every few weeks when its Java stack falls over.

More information about the License-review mailing list