Follow-up Comment #5, task #6772 (project admin):
Since when have you started interfering in the content and licensing
practices of the projects applying for your site?
We license under BSD and have been doing so for five years; we have no
intention of including a GNU header or GNU copyright notices in our code, as
that would create legal exposure for users of our library that we wish to
avoid. We follow normal practice for non-GNU projects, in which the project
license is specified once in a prominent README or LICENSE file and
considered to adhere to the entire distribution.
I was the founding president of the Open Source Initiative and a co-author
and for years principal maintainer of the Open Source Definition, and I must
say I find being lectured as you have done *extremely* offensive. You are not
a lawyer. Don't pretend to be a lawyer or tell people what is legally
required, because you don't know.
I'll put it bluntly: you need to back off of this crap, not just with me but
with everyone. Leave project leads to take the measures *they* think are
legally prudent; it is their liability, not yours. You have no business
requiring anything beyond an OSD-conformant license, and if you insist on
meddling in what doesn't concern you I will spread the word that gna is now
being run by legalistic assholes and anyone with sense should stay far, *far*
away from it.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://gna.org/task/?6772>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
_______________________________________________
Register mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/register
