License compatibility is mostly an FSF-made and GPL-specific doctrine. I can't see how it would make any sense for the OSI to provide guidance on license compatibility beyond acknowledging (as the OSI occasionally has done) the FSF's authority on the topic.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:46:39PM +0000, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote: > So what is the point of the OSI if it cannot do a simple up or down vote on a > license submission from NASA after 3 years or provide any compatibility > guidance on the licenses it managed to approve in the distant past? > > Especially if the FSF has no problems in providing such guidance? > > From: David Woolley > <for...@david-woolley.me.uk<mailto:for...@david-woolley.me.uk>> > Date: Wednesday, Feb 15, 2017, 4:17 PM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > <license-discuss@opensource.org<mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>> > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] OSI equivalent > > On 15/02/17 16:58, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) wrote: > > Does OSI have a license compatibility chart for the various approved > > licenses? > > I would have thought that any such document would constitute legal > advice, which is illegal for half the list members to provide, and the > other half would only provide in the context of their specific client's > circumstances. > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org > https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
