[License-review] Submission: Python-2.0.1

[McCoy Smith]

Max:

The file you attached appears to be the 2.0 version of the Python 
license not the 2.0.1 version, although the diff file appears to reflect 
the 2.0.1 version. Also, the 2.0.1 version seems to incorporate the 
CNRI-GPL compatible portion, which you've also separately asked to be 
approved (it is not clear to me if this is intended to be a request to 
approve it as a separate stand-alone license or as just a component of 
the Python 2.0.1. license; this is somewhat complicated by these 
licenses appearing to be concatenations of a list of multiple different 
licenses).

I understand that the Python licensing situation seems to be a mess, and 
the approvals at SPDX and OSI may not comport with long-standing 
licensing practice, but I think if there's a request for approval is 
required, we'd need to know exactly what actual licenses need approval 
(OSI doesn't approve separate parts of licenses, unless they are 
themselves stand-alone licenses being used in that way), and have a 
clear understanding of are the differences between older licenses that 
have been approved and what the current license for which approval is 
requested. Frankly, I'm having a real hard time doing that (the diff 
file isn't helping much as it doesn't really highlight differences, it 
just shows whole blocks that might or might not be identical being 
swapped out). I tried to do a compare in LibreOffice between what looks 
like 2.0.1. and 2.0 but that didn't help either.

Could you work with the folks at Python to put together a clearer 
explanation of what is the license or licenses that Python is using, how 
they differ from the license or licenses that have been approved in the 
past, and why those changes were made? I'm not sure what OSI has now is 
sufficient for us to make an intelligent analysis and decision on the 
various Python licenses.

McCoy Smith

On 3/20/2026 9:13 AM, Max Mehl wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Following a discussion on license-discuss@ 
> <https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2026-March/022526.html> and 
> a quick coordination with Deb from the Python Software Foundation (in 
> Cc), I would like to propose that Python-2.0.1 be considered an 
> officially approved (legacy) Open Source license. In the same step, I 
> propose to mark Python-2.0 as either Superseded or Voluntarily Retired.
>
> In parallel, I propose the same for CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible, for 
> which I opened a separate thread.
>
> I will not repeat all the backstory but refer to the aforementioned 
> discussion and spdx/license-list-XML#2197 
> <https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2197>. In short: 
> Python-2.0.1 is the license that most closely represents the license 
> under which CPython has been published since 2001 
> <https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-201/> (in combination 
> with 0BSD for documentation). In comparison with Python-2.0, which is 
> already OSI approved, the most remarkable difference is an update in 
> the CNRI portion to make it GPL compatible.
>
> Attached, you will find the license text for Python-2.0.1 as made 
> available by SPDX, as well as a diff file against Python-2.0 (ignoring 
> formatting and some non-critical boilerplate texts to make things 
> easier for you).
>
> Best,
> Max
>
> -- 
>
> *Max Mehl*
>
> Open Source / Supply Chain
>
> Enterprise-Team Chief Technology Office (CTO)
>
> DB Systel GmbH / Deutsche Bahn
>
>
> Schedule a meeting: cal.com/mxmehl <https://cal.com/mxmehl>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Pflichtangaben anzeigen 
> <https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260319>
>
> Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie 
> hier: https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20260514/adfd9ddb/attachment.htm>