Deprecate (strongly) Re: REMOVE (entirely) the Artistic License 1.0?

[Ernest Prabhakar]

Hi all,

On Jul 9, 2008, at 1:39 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> Russ Nelson wrote:
>> Tom Callaway suggests that, because of the Artistic License's
>> involvement (loss) in Jacobsen & Katzer, we should apply all possible
>> pressure to stop people from using the Artistic License.
>> http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-open-source-legal-decision-jacobsen.html
>> He suggests that we entirely remove its approval.  Not merely remove
>> it from the website, but explicitly say that it is no longer an
>> approved license.
>
> I disagree with this.  It should have a note saying that it is  
> strongly deprecated, and perhaps even explaining why.  It should  
> remain approved and on the website, for the reasons you stated.

I agree.   Since we hadn't done so before, I added a notice like the  
following to all the superseded licenses:

http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php

> (NOTE: This license has been superseded by the Artistic License,  
> Version 2.0)


Given the special circumstances of Artistic 1.0, I propose extending  
it to say:

> (NOTE: This license has been superseded by the Artistic License,  
> Version 2.0. Given the legal issues around Version 1.0, we strongly  
> encourage all developers to move their affected code to Version 2.0  
> as soon as possible)

Does that sound reasonable?

-- Ernie P.