On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:48:14AM -0700, Micheas Herman wrote: > > > > I don't think the FreeBSD project could afford to have this license > > cataloging scheme regularly inspected by appropriate legal counsel for > > each of the various different jurisdictions around the world and for > > them to approve it as accurate and legally watertight. > > I think that FreeBSD should piggy back on the OSI and just list > the following licenses: > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical plus "other".
Using the list from OSI or NetBSD or similar would be a good way do an initial population of the file. > > This could be a filter of sorts for those that want it. IANAL > but just listing the license should not be more or less risky > for the project than distributing the source code, and it might > even reduce the risk of distributing pre compiled binaries as > there is at least a good faith effort to comply with the > license(s) and make it easy for the end user to be aware of the > license(s) of the code. > We already have a mechanism to prevent distribution distfiles and packages on our mirrors with the current NO_CDROM, RESTRICTED and NO_PACKAGE flags. The license framework is ment to make these more finegrained and give endusers a better handle to avoid using specific licenses. As you say, this does not change that it will be done on a best effort basis, which may, or may not, be good enough for your specific use case, but it does provide better control. -erwin -- Erwin Lansing http://droso.org Prediction is very difficult especially about the future er...@freebsd.org
pgpbTtjJfG9Fu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
