[CAVO] L.A. County continues to announce open source voting victory
masson at opensource.org
Tue Jun 16 22:59:56 UTC 2015
Have you all thought about constructing specific language to offer
entities (e.g. LA and Travis) who are interested in ensuring their
requirements for open source software are met?
In addition to providing authenticity and consistency, there are also
benefits in assessment. That is, a requirement that software include an
OSI Approved License allows organizations to quickly assess if the
licenses are valid and meets the expectations around software freedom.
This removes the need to assess each application's license (and it's
affordances/restrictions) that claims to be open source. Any
organization can submit software and claim it is open source, but then
the burden is on the county (in this case) to assess the license. By
using an OSI license, that work as been done.
In addition, because many of the OSI approved licenses are globally
recognized and well understood pedigrees, there are many resources that
can help explain each license (permissions, requirements, compatibility,
I think offering those new to open source, not only the language to
authenticate open source software but the value of using OSI approved
licenses can be much more compelling than a simple "compliance and/or
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 17:05 -0700, Brent Turner wrote:
> But is it really open source -- ??
> If so-- I'd say we get ready to validate but deserve a little
> If it's a ruse.. and they are going to attempt to perpetrate a shell
> game licensing scheme--then I guess we continue to " cut the ring in
> half "
> The plot thickens !!
> CAVO mailing list
> CAVO at opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CAVO