[License-discuss] discussion of L-R process [was Re: [License-review] Approval: Server Side Public License, Version 2 (SSPL v2)]

Bruce Perens bruce at perens.com
Fri Mar 15 19:27:25 UTC 2019

> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:58 AM Smith, McCoy <mccoy.smith at intel.com>
> wrote:
>> Having a “more licenses should be approved,” “we need licenses to address
>> new business models” or “I will represent the silent majority” candidate
>> might serve to address the perception issue that not all issues or concerns
>> are being fully addressed.
This candidate is Lior Kaplan. On her candidate's page, I asked her which
rights she was OK with giving up, and she declined to answer.
No other candidate took that platform. I did push a few with questions, and
all the others seem to be on the side of continuing with the OSD and
pushing back against the recent submissions, except one suggested that we
fix the word "distribute" in OSD#9, which I agree with.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190315/1e8feb81/attachment.html>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list