[License-review] AGPL timeline & why cautious processes with real-world testing are better (was Re: For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4))

[VanL]

Hi Henrik,

On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 1:26 PM Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi>
wrote:

> I just want to clarify for the record, that I'm not currently active
> in any projects where a network copyleft license would be relevant. I
> did however make a statement that I'm one of those people who
> generally favors copyleft and increasingly network copyleft, and that
> I see CAL as a great license that I'd probably choose if I'm working
> on such projects in the future. In short, I just wanted to say I think
> it improves and modernizes on the state of the art, and I look forward
> to having it available in our arsenal of licenses.
>
> For example, until some years ago I was dabbling with various e-voting
> projects. CAL would be a perfect licenses if I ever returned to that
> area of interest.
>

Thanks for the clarification. I was referring in part to you, as well as
Lukas (upthread):

"I am eagerly awaiting OSI approval for the CAL because it does a much
better job at protecting end user freedoms than any other copyleft license
I know. The CAL only lacks two wishlist items for me (CC-BY-4.0-style
upgrade clause, GPLv3-style additional terms mechanism). While I will keep
using the GPL license suite for compatibility, I expect to start
dual-licensing future projects under the CAL. Despite its weird name the CAL
looks very interesting for a standard webapp context, without any
Blockchains."

I number of people have been asserting that no one but Holo is interested
in the CAL, and so it should wait to get uptake before approval. Aside from
the chicken-and-egg situation that creates, I just wanted to say that if a
few people on this list seem to have some interest, it seems reasonable
that they would be representative of some percentage of people in the
broader community who would also show similar interest.

Thanks,
Van
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20200103/6c4e3ef9/attachment.html>