<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Dear License-Review,<br>
<br>
Below is the recommendation of the License Committee to the Board
that the JAM License be approved as an Open Source Initiative
Approved License. I apologize for the delay in making the
recommendation to the Board.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
Pamela Chestek<br>
Chair, License Committee<br>
Open Source Initiative<br>
<br>
License: JAM License (Exhibit A)<br>
Submitted: April 25, 2021,
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2021-April/005139.html">http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2021-April/005139.html</a><br>
Decision date: due no later than the first Board meeting after June
24, 2021.<br>
<br>
License Review Committee Recommendation: <br>
<br>
Resolved that it is the opinion of the OSI that the JAM License be
approved as an Open Source Initiative Approved license in the
Other/Miscellaneous category of licenses.<br>
<br>
<u>Rationale Document</u><br>
<br>
Notes: This license has been in use for at least 20 years. It is not
widely used but needed to build the widely distributed Argyll Color
Management System. <br>
<br>
One commenter noted that the license does not expressly grant the
right to modify, although it can be construed as implying a right to
modify by stating that modifications must be marked. Another
commenter pointed out that less-than-perfect language is common in
older open source licenses and opined that “In this case it is clear
from the license text that ‘use’ was meant to encompass permission
to modify.” Both Debian and Fedora distribute software with this
license, so presumably these projects find that it meets their
standards for free and open source licenses. The original commenter
agreed that “this one probably meets the OSD if you assume a lot of
liberality on implied license grants (both copyright, and patent).”<br>
<br>
There was some discussion about whether a license in such limited
use should have the attention of the OSI, but it has been submitted
for approval and, to date, OSI has not used the number of projects
adopting a license as a factor in deciding whether a license can be
approved.<br>
<br>
For these reasons we recommend that the license be approved. <br>
<br>
<i>Exhibit A</i><br>
<br>
License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
freely, as long as this copyright notice is retained and
modifications are clearly marked.<br>
<br>
ALL WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/25/2021 5:34 PM, Jack Hill wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:alpine.DEB.2.21.2104251721000.2109@marsh.hcoop.net">As a
licensee of Jam, I'm asking for legacy approval of the following
terms:
<br>
<br>
"""
<br>
License is hereby granted to use this software and distribute it
<br>
freely, as long as this copyright notice is retained and
modifications
<br>
are clearly marked.
<br>
<br>
ALL WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY DISCLAIMED.
<br>
"""
<br>
<br>
This is the license used by Jam [0] and its forks [1][2][3] (n.b.
the boost version is also distributed under the Boost license).
Outside of Boost, I don't believe this build tool is widely used.
However, it is needed to build at least one important open source
package: the Argyll Color Management System. Argyll is the only
open source package that I know of that can generate color
calibration profiles, so it is critically important for the use of
open source software in fields where that is important.
<br>
<br>
I believe that the proliferation category for this license is
Other/Miscellaneous.
<br>
<br>
In other discussions [4] I've had about this license, the
problematic points were what "distribute freely" meant, and how
modifications could be clearly marked. The Argyll fork of Jam
marks modifications as follows:
<br>
<br>
"""
<br>
This if "Argyll-Jam", a simple derivative of the "FT-Jam" build
tool, based and
<br>
100% compatible with Jam 2.5. See <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.freetype.org/jam/">http://www.freetype.org/jam/</a> for
more
<br>
details about FT-Jam.
<br>
<br>
This is the "FT-Jam" 2.5.2 release, with minor ArgyllCMS tweaks,
<br>
and the ArgyllCMS V1.3.3 Jambase as the default rule set.
<br>
<br>
Note that you'll find the original Jam README in the file
README.ORG
<br>
"""
<br>
<br>
[0] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.perforce.com/documentation/jam-documentation">https://www.perforce.com/documentation/jam-documentation</a>
<br>
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.freetype.org/jam/index.html">https://www.freetype.org/jam/index.html</a>
<br>
[2] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Compiling.html">http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Compiling.html</a>
<br>
[3]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/tools/build/doc/html/index.html#bbv2.jam">https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/tools/build/doc/html/index.html#bbv2.jam</a><br>
[4]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-04/msg00436.html">https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-04/msg00436.html</a>
<br>
<br>
Best,
<br>
Jack
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
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.
<br>
<br>
License-review mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>