On 3/11/2020 1:42 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 3/11/20 6:56 AM, Russell Nelson wrote: >>> I still say we should use the Vaccine License as a case example of an >>> unpassable license on our website. >> Not listing unpassable examples is a long-standing policy decision. We >> have plenty of examples of what passes muster. I've never seen why we >> need to list licenses that don't comply. Why do you think we need to >> provide that information? > Because the OSI needs to stop relying on the idea that people trust us > to decide fairly what makes sense in an OSS license. They don't. We > need to explain *why* the various clauses of the OSD exist, and not just > do "we're experienced and we know what we're doing". Examples of > unpassable licenses *with an explanation of why they are unpassable* > would help. > > For the vaccine license, I think I'll write a blog post to show you what > I mean. > Have you been reading the rationale documents I've been writing (for both approved and unapproved licenses) since I became chair? Is that not what you mean?
CALv1: https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Archived+Discussions+on+Not+Approved+Licenses/Rationale+Vaccine+License/ Vaccine License: https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Archived+Discussions+on+Not+Approved+Licenses/Rationale+Vaccine+License/ They're linked from the rejected licenses page. Pam _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
