[License-review] For Approval: License Zero Reciprocal Public License

[Kyle Mitchell]

On 2017-10-19 21:10, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > But for God's sake don't tell the open software community,
> > of all people, that their identity's defined by an opaque,
> > bureaucratic rite on a mailing list, overtly camouflaging an
> > arbitrary decision process that can't be changed, no matter
> > how frustrating it may be.  I couldn't defend that.  I don't
> > know anyone my age or younger who'd want to try.
>
> This is overstated. The OSI board has usually discussed on this public list
> the reasons for rejection, when there are practical reasons for rejection
> that are not explicitly stated in the OSD. The reasons I just set down are
> not put forth as an addition to the OSD, just a statement of what some
> perfectly reasonable concerns should be. I think we can develop such a list
> without ever insisting that it be made a modification to the OSD, and also
> without insisting that the OSI board limit themselves to a programatic
> interpetation of the OSD.

I hope I overstated reality.  I fear I haven't overstated
probable perception.  And not just of unread greenhorns, the
"new kids" I sometimes read about.

Nobody is asking me, but I'd strongly encourage OSI to start
by properly conditioning outside perception of what it is
that this process does, by edits to the public webpages
describing it.  If that means alluding to a list of policy
concerns that doesn't exist yet, so be it.  Take the
opportunity to solicit help combing the license-review
archives and bringing together material in a repository
somewhere.

-- 
Kyle Mitchell, attorney // Oakland // (510) 712 - 0933