[License-review] MIT-CMU license for Python Pillow

[Richard Fontana]

Totally unrelated but in case anyone in the OSI and/or Python
communities cares and is motivated/knowledgeable to try to change
this:
One of the TROVE license classifiers is:
"License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Free Documentation License (FDL)"
however, if I'm not mistaken (and I hope I'm not), no version of the
FDL has ever been OSI approved.

As for whether to add a TROVE classifier for "MIT-CMU", that seems
beyond the scope of this list. I think there may be some confusion
about the OSI license approval process though based on what I read in
the linked Pillow issue. OSI licenses are formally reviewed for
approval by the OSI board. Approval is not by informal mailing list
consensus (although the OSI board generally attempts to act in a way
that is consistent with whatever consensus emerges on this list).

Richard

On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 1:00 PM Jeffrey Clark <aclark at aclark.net> wrote:
>
> Yes please! Or at least do you think it's OK to submit a request to PyPI for a TROVE classifier as described in https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/issues/7942 based on this discussion? Thank you
>
> Alex
>
> ---
> Jeffrey "Alex" Clark
> Python Pillow Creator
> ACLARK.NET, LLC President
> DC Python Executive Director
> Let's Pay the Maintainers ✨
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:04 PM Josh Berkus <josh at berkus.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hey, committee:
>>
>> Can we have some feedback on this?  Let's not run out the clock.
>>
>> On 6/17/24 09:34, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> >
>> >> Would it be possible to add the legacy "MIT-CMU" license to the OSI
>> >> approved licenses list so Python Pillow (Python Imaging Library fork)
>> >> project can update its license to MIT-CMU, which we now consider "more
>> >> correct" than HPND, details here:
>> >
>> > My vote: this license is clearly open source, and it would make sense to
>> > have it listed with the note that it is an MIT variant.
>> >
>> > At some stage, it might be good to go through the rest of the list of
>> > "MIT variants"; nice of Fedora to have collected them for us (although I
>> > don't agree that all of these are MIT variants, but some of them
>> > obviously are).  We might want to discuss how to represent these on the
>> > website.
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Josh Berkus
>>
> _______________________________________________
> The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Communication from the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
>
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org