[License-review] For Approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Sat Jun 29 02:58:48 UTC 2019

Pamela wrote:

> >We need more diversity of opinion, or at least more voices
>> > with the same opinion so that we know the opinion is commonly held.
Josh wrote:

> Not sure about that; this list is noisy enough that I think most of us
>> hold back if we agree with an already-stated viewpoint.  If you really
>> want to get a straw poll of agreement, it would be far better to have a
>> tool that let us vote up/down critiques of proposed licenses than wait
>> for "me, too" posts on a mailing list.
I suppose there is a point in having a straw poll of *agreement.* But I
think license approval *shouldn't be based upon a popular vote,* but on
whether the license preserves software freedom and meets the OSD. And I
would add, is a good deal for the developer and user community. Some of the
recent submissions seemed to me to to be hostile to the developer or user


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190628/a9b18789/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the License-review mailing list