On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0000, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) wrote: > > > > Even if you were correct in the assertions you've made about ARL code, why > > is a new license needed for contributors other than ARL? > > Are you suggesting a dual license scheme, where all copyrighted portions are > under Apache 2.0, and all non-copyrighted portions are under the ARL OSL?
No, I'm just suggesting why not adopt a rule that all contributors (other than ARL -- though for the reasons others have stated I think this should also apply to ARL) license contributions under the Apache License 2.0. As a few have pointed out, all code that is nominally licensed under open source licenses will contain noncopyrighted portions. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
