[License-discuss] Python-2.0.1 and CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible

[Max Mehl]

Hi all,

Thanks for the additional comments. I’ve met Deb (ED of PSF) in Berlin this week and she was fine with me submitting both licenses, provided I Cc her in the submission emails.

Consequently, I’ve opened two separate threads on license-review at .

Best,
Max


From: License-discuss <license-discuss-bounces at lists.opensource.org> on behalf of McCoy Smith <mccoy at lexpan.law>
Date: Tuesday, 17. March 2026 at 15:34
To: license-discuss at lists.opensource.org <license-discuss at lists.opensource.org>
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Python-2.0.1 and CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible


Max:

If you think the newer version of the Python license ought to be approved by the OSI, someone needs to submit it through the license approval process, described here: https://opensource.org/licenses/review-process

Given that it sounds like 2.0.1 is now being used by Python, and 2.0 is only a legacy of older versions, I'd suggest that if submitted, at the same time 2.0 be "Voluntarily Retired" as have many other licenses that have been superceded by newer versions (see the list here: https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded%2Cvoluntarily-retired); if it is not, 2.0 will likely be tagged (if 2.0.1 is approved) as superseded, like these licenses: https://opensource.org/licenses?categories=superseded Same comment for the newer CNRI license versus the old one.

I would suggest that someone from the Python community (if you aren't one already) do the submission, if that result is indeed desired. The review process requirements are in the link above.

*This is no commentary on the approvability of the 2.0.1. or new CNRI license, which I haven't read, but just a general comment on how the result you want might be accomplished.

McCoy Smith

On 3/16/2026 5:46 PM, Pamela Chestek wrote:

I don't see a reason. The OSI generally only reacts to requests for license approval, it doesn't generally approve licenses without them being submitted. I'm assuming it hasn't be approved just because no one has asked for it before.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
4641 Post St.
Unit 4316
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
+1 919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com<mailto:pamela at chesteklegal.com>
www.chesteklegal.com<http://www.chesteklegal.com/>


On 3/6/2026 5:47 AM, Max Mehl wrote:
Hi everyone,

As requested by Nick, I would like point to an ongoing discussion on Python licenses, affecting both OSI's and SPDX’s realms, and request OSI’s approval of two licenses.

As you know, the licensing history of Python is quite complex, and the current license consists of multiple other licenses representing the long history and the different “ownerships” of the project (CWI, CNRI, BeOpen, PSF). spdx/license-list-XML#2197<https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2197> and an email to spdx-legal@<https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/topic/107252308> describe a bunch of intertwined problems around the identifiers of components of Python licenses. Recently, OSI fixed some of those already, thanks!

Now, I wonder about the status of the license SPDX describes as Python-2.0.1<https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.1.html>. IIRC, the main difference between Python-2.0<https://spdx.org/licenses/Python-2.0.html> and Python-2.0.1 is in the CNRI part, making it GPL compatible (the “Virginia clause”). SPDX lists this updated sub-part as CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible<https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible.html>, a successor of CNRI-Python<https://spdx.org/licenses/CNRI-Python.html>.

Since Python 1.6.1 and 2.0.1, Python releases have been licensed under Python-2.0.1 (and recently additionally 0BSD for its documentation), while Python-2.0 has only been used for Python 1.6 and 2.0. So modern CPython releases would probably be best described as being licensed under "Python-2.0.1 AND 0BSD".

But OSI only approved Python-2.0 as an Open Source license, as well as the old CNRI-Python part. This is why I suggest OSI to approve Python-2.0.1 and CNRI-Python-GPL-Compatible as Open Source licenses, and mark Python-2.0 and CNRI-Python as superseded. Is there any reason not to?

Best,
Max

--
Max Mehl
Open Source / Supply Chain
Enterprise-Team Chief Technology Office (CTO)
DB Systel GmbH / Deutsche Bahn

Schedule a meeting: cal.com/mxmehl<https://cal.com/mxmehl>


________________________________

Pflichtangaben anzeigen<https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260305>

Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz

_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.

License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss at lists.opensource.org<mailto:License-discuss at lists.opensource.org>
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org



_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.

License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss at lists.opensource.org<mailto:License-discuss at lists.opensource.org>
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org


________________________________

Pflichtangaben anzeigen<https://www.deutschebahn.com/pflichtangaben/20260319>

Nähere Informationen zur Datenverarbeitung im DB-Konzern finden Sie hier: https://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/datenschutz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20260320/1736eb4e/attachment-0001.htm>