[License-review] For Approval: Convertible Free Software License, Version 1.3 (C-FSL v1.3)

[Nigel T]

5.1.f is a deal killer for me...



Essentially it means that every fork must exist in a public repo and it is
trivially easy to not be in compliance.  For example I be working on
something, do a local commit, get busy for a month without doing a push and
boom, I’m out of compliance.



That said I don’t think it fails freedom 0 because of 5.1.f other than
being really easy to be out of compliance.



In the interest of disclosure I am the (junior) author of the Upstream
Compatibility License…there was a discussion of asymmetry at the time of
approval.  UCL derivative works are dual licensed as Apache and UCL.  UCL
itself is just OSL with a one line change in 1C.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:11 PM Smith, McCoy <mccoy.smith at intel.com> wrote:

> *>>From:* License-review [mailto:
> license-review-bounces at lists.opensource.org] *On Behalf Of *Carlo Piana
> *>>*
>
> >># THERE IS MORE!
>
> >>Under Section 5.1
>
> >>f) You must make available to the public any Derivative Work or changes to the Work within one month from their creation.
>
> >>This creates another huge asymmetry.
>
> >>Under copyright law, I can decide whether or not to publish the code i
> contribute. Under the proposed license, it is required that this right is
> waived as a condition to use the copyright. I think this is unprecedented.
> I might be making changes that I don't want to release to the public
> neither in object code, because they are buggy, because I don't want to
> take responsibility if anybody uses them. In this case, if I fork the
> project I have NO WAY TO AVOID PROVIDING IT UPSTREAM.
>
> Hence the value of Freedom Zero of the FSD.  I continue to think that that
> concept is inherent in the OSD (in particular OSD 9), and not having it be
> a part of the OSD results in rather bizarre theoretical results, which I
> outlined here:
> http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2018-October/003751.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190111/f464c9a8/attachment-0001.html>