<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
So I assume you are withdrawing this license?<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
4641 Post St.<br>
Unit 4316<br>
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762<br>
+1 919-800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
On 1/21/2026 8:23 AM, M.samet Duman via License-review wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:AC8AAC95-CE30-4EC4-8D28-1AA5A16A3F52@icloud.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Thank you for your honest feedback. It's accurate to say so.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Nevertheless, thank you for your time and attention, and I
will be more careful about timing and framing in future
submissions.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sincerely,</div>
<div>Mehmet Samet Duman</div>
<div>Author of Project Tick</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Kevin P. Fleming
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lists.osi-license-review@kevin.km6g.us"><lists.osi-license-review@kevin.km6g.us></a> \u015funlar\u0131 yazd\u0131
(21 Oca 2026 19:12):</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<title></title>
<div>
<div>On Wed, Jan 21, 2026, at 10:32, <a
href="http://m.samet/" moz-do-not-send="true">M.samet</a>
Duman via License-review wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" id="qt"
style="overflow-wrap:break-word;">
<div>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.</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
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
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:License-review@lists.opensource.org">License-review@lists.opensource.org</a>
<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>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>