[License-review] [License Review] Project Tick General Public License v1.0

[Pamela Chestek]

I would suggest that you submit the license to license-discuss before 
submitting it to license-review.  License-discuss is meant for working 
on the kinks in a work in progress and license-review is when the 
license is finalized and begins the formal process of approval. Once a 
license has been submitted to license-review it can't change and instead 
will have to be withdrawn and resubmitted, withdrawn and resubmitted, if 
you want to make changes. This is very challenging for the 
license-review committee to manage. So it's best to have the language as 
final as possible before submitting it for approval.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
4641 Post St.
Unit 4316
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
+1 919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com

On 1/21/2026 9:17 AM, M.samet Duman via License-review wrote:
>
> Hello Pamela,
>
> Yes, I am withdrawing this draft from formal review.
>
> The text discussed was an early draft, and I will resubmit only after 
> Version 2 is finalized and formally published.
>
> Thank you for the clarification.
>
> Best regards,
> Mehmet Samet Duman
> Author of Project Tick
>> Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com> şunları yazdı (21 Oca 2026 
>> 19:56):
>>
>> So I assume you are withdrawing this license?
>>
>> Pam
>>
>> Pamela S. Chestek
>> Chestek Legal
>> 4641 Post St.
>> Unit 4316
>> El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
>> +1 919-800-8033
>> pamela at chesteklegal.com
>> www.chesteklegal.com
>>
>> On 1/21/2026 8:23 AM, M.samet Duman via License-review wrote:
>>> Thank you for your honest feedback. It's accurate to say so.
>>>
>>> I should have made it clear from the outset that the text under 
>>> discussion was a draft and that a revised version was already 
>>> planned for publication. It was my mistake not to state this from 
>>> the beginning, and I understand how frustrating that can be in a 
>>> review context.
>>>
>>> The aim was not to waste reviewers' time, but to verify that the 
>>> direction of the changes was consistent with the Open Source 
>>> Definition before publication. However, I fully agree that the 
>>> correct approach would have been to wait for the text to be 
>>> finalized or to explicitly label it as a draft in the initial 
>>> submission.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, thank you for your time and attention, and I will be 
>>> more careful about timing and framing in future submissions.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Mehmet Samet Duman
>>> Author of Project Tick
>>>
>>>> Kevin P. Fleming <lists.osi-license-review at kevin.km6g.us> şunları 
>>>> yazdı (21 Oca 2026 19:12):
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026, at 10:32, M.samet <http://m.samet/> Duman via 
>>>> License-review wrote:
>>>>> I wanted to clarify that the license version you reviewed is an 
>>>>> earlier draft. The revised Version 2 of the Project Tick General 
>>>>> Public License will be released on February 2, 2026, and will 
>>>>> explicitly address the concerns you raised.
>>>>
>>>> Since you didn't mention this in your submission, you've now asked 
>>>> people in this group to review a license which you plan to replace 
>>>> in less than two weeks. This will not make you any friends in the 
>>>> review group, to say the least.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20260121/f62cf63d/attachment-0001.htm>