[License-discuss] CDDL 1.0 vs. 1.1

Mike Milinkovich mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
Fri Dec 11 15:59:22 UTC 2015

On 11/12/2015 10:33 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> Sun never bothered to request approval for 1.1 as the lawyers involved 
> regarded the changes as trivial.

Hmmm. Doesn't that put consumers in the awkward position of using 
software which is not strictly speaking under an OSI-approved license?

I notice that the license at Glassfish has also been updated to have 
Oracle as the license steward. Would anyone object if I ask them to 
submit the revision to license-review for approval?

> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Mike Milinkovich 
> <mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org <mailto:mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org>> 
> wrote:
>     I note that Glassfish uses CDDL 1.1
>     <https://glassfish.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL_1_1.html>, but that
>     all references on the OSI website are to CDDL 1.0
>     <http://opensource.org/licenses/CDDL-1.0>.
>     Does anyone know the reason why there is this version mismatch?
>     Did something fall through the cracks here, or is there some
>     longer story?

Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich at eclipse.org
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20151211/7091e147/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list