YAPL is bad (was: Re: Backlog assistance?)

[Karsten M. Self]

on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 08:58:30AM +0200, Chris Gray (chris.gray at acunia.com) wrote:
> "Karsten M. Self" wrote:
> 
> > on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 08:56:55PM +0100, phil hunt (philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > What if, as part of the process of approving a new licence, the
> > > proposer of the license had to write a rationale of why a new license
> > > is necessary, and why no existing OSI-certified licence exists
> > > that does the job.
> > >
> > > Is this a good idea?
> >
> > I think so.
> >
> 
> Doesn't step (2) of
> <URL:http://www.opensource.org/docs/certification_mark.html#approval>
> already imply this?

IIRC, the change in submission processes occured as a result of the
suggestions.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?              Home of the brave
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/                    Land of the free
   Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA!  http://www.freesklyarov.org
Geek for Hire                      http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20010925/a4ed6ec6/attachment.sig>