Moving this thread to license-discuss. The discussion on license-review
should be about the merits of the license. A discussion of the OSI
license review process itself should be on license discuss.
Pam
Pamela Chestek
Chair, License Committee
Open Source Initiative
On 1/3/20 11:49 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
VanL wrote this evening:
comply with all the unwritten and ever-changing rules, including the newly
articulated "requires 6+ years of public use" requirement that you are
proposing.
I don't make the rules; in this context, I'm just an individual interested in
FOSS licensing sharing my opinion. Your license is unique and enters
unprecedented ground that no FOSS license covered before in 30+ years. It's
entirely reasonable to give unprecedented scrutiny to a copyleft license that
reaches well beyond what has been previously contemplated for copyleft.
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - he/him
Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy:
https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/
_______________________________________________
License-review mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
--
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
