[License-review] Encouraging discussion around the technicalities of licensing

[Patrick Masson]

Martijn,
No sin that I can see. Often a healthy reminder from a new set of eyes
helps with focus.
Thank you,Patrick
On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 16:47 +0000, Simon Phipps wrote:
> Many thanks for your comments, Martijn. 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 10:04 AM Martijn Verburg <
> martijnverburg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > *Background Disclaimer* - I sit on a fair number of industry body
> > boards, community groups, steering committees etc around the Java
> > ecosystem - so I'm biased in how I perceive communication.
> > 
> > I’m a newcomer to this list and I’ve mostly been in ‘read-only’
> > mode so I can figure out what the list norms are. There is one
> > aspect that I feel as a collective we could do a little better on,
> > I'll try to explain below.
> > 
> > I’ve seen some really excellent messages and threads clearly
> > explaining why a license proposal fails a particular OSD clause.
> > It’s been truly insightful stuff and it's the sort of communication
> > that really makes the OSI stand out as an entity!
> > 
> > I’ve also seen quite a fair bit of emotive/hostile language used,
> > even against folks who are new here and come in good faith (yes I
> > feel we should assume good faith in the first instance). I
> > understand why OSS licensing and discussions around software
> > freedoms bring out strong feelings, these topics *matter* and have
> > far-reaching impacts on our industry and even (dare I say it) our
> > society as a whole.
> > 
> > I’d very much like to see the OSI continue to be held in high
> > regard, whose members defend the OSD principles with reasoned
> > arguments and even offer guidance to license authors on how they
> > can meet those principles. I think if we focus on that in this list
> > we'll get better long term results for the OSI and the defense of
> > the OSD clauses.
> > 
> > Right, now that I've committed the mailing list sin of the newcomer
> > telling everyone how to behave.... :-) - I'll happily take
> > comments/questions/feedback and even some sticks and stones ;-).
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Martijn
>  
> I agree; the list is for discussing the approval of the license and
> not for the approval of the submitter or their business. We welcome
> comments that help the submitter know how to correct defects in the
> text, or to understand why their goals cannot achieve the effect they
> are seeking with the license while still creating an OSD-compliant
> license. We also welcome comments that support the text as OSD
> compliant. Comments aimed at the submitter alone, such as about their
> business, business model or investors, are rarely appropriate.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Simon
> -- 
> Simon Phipps, President, The Open Source Initiative
> www.opensource.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________License-review mailing
> listLicense-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
-- 
  ||  |   | || |  ||  ||  | || |  |||  |  |||  

Patrick Masson
General Manager & Director, Open Source Initiative
855 El Camino Real, Ste 13A, #270
Palo Alto, CA 94301
United States
Office: (415) 857-5398
Mobile: (970) 4MASSON
Freenode: OSIMasson
Email: masson at opensource.org
Website: www.opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190206/5e5a5e78/attachment.html>