Request for approval: EUPL (European Union Public Licence)

[Matthew Flaschen]

Russ Nelson wrote:
> Russ Nelson writes:
>  > Well then we should perhaps stick to realistic risks, then, eh?
> 
> Maybe I should be more gentle, Matthew.  In the USA, there are laws
> against fraud (seeking commercial gain through misrepresentation).

I never said it would be a deliberate error.

> Not to mention the fact that people actually speak the languages into
> which the EUPL will be translated, and they'll care about Open Source
> Definition compliance just as much as you do.

Some will, but it's questionable whether they'll even know what's going 
on here.  There are about 300,000 fluent Irish speakers.  How many of 
those do you think frequent OSI mailing lists?

> To the extent that nobody speaks that language or reads that
> license, that means that the harm would be greatly reduced.

Not really, because once an error is found it can be used repeatedly by 
non-speakers.

> So, worry about things that might happen on the sly.  Don't worry
> about extremely public misbehavior which will be caught on day one.

The license says that new binding translations can be issued at any 
time, not just Day 1.  Once a new binding version is issued, you have to 
use it as soon as you find out.

Matt Flaschen