On 03/09/2012 08:55 AM, John Cowan wrote:
Karl Fogel scripsit:If you want an organization that recommends licenses, the FSF is happy to help. I agree that OSI should have a short-list of recommended licenses, but the politics of dis-recommending some organization's license are too much for them.This isn't actually the case, by the way. It's not the politics; it's more the time it takes to do it right.I sat on the committee that came up with OSI's current classifications. Its original remit was to evaluate licenses into best/okay/bad, but no one except me was willing to actually say that a license was bad or that people shouldn't use it, so we wound up with the existing, basically fact-based classification scheme. And we took plenty of time just to get to that, so it wasn't a matter of time. I believe I was the only non-lawyer on that committee, except for ESR who wasn't able to attend most of the meetings.
<<attachment: bruce.vcf>>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
