* Andrew DeMarsh: >> >> Quite a few people view such a requirement in a software license as >> DFSG-noncompliant. I think it would be a bit odd if OSI adopted such >> a requirement within its contribution process. >> > > I'm not sure that it would be required in the license text itself possibly > only interacting with the mailing list review, I am confused as to which > DFSG guideline this would run afoul, (Possibly 5?) could you elaborate?
I think the most common interpretation is that outlawing anonymous changes is an implicit restriction on field of endeavor (because you cannot modify the software in a context in which you want to stay anonymous for reasons of personal safety, say). On the other hand, the GPL (version 2) seems to disallow anonymous changes, and was obviously deemed DFSG-compliant. >> It also does not stop people from submitting time wasters under a >> real, government-issued identity. >> > > Theoretically if this happened repeatedly moderator action could be taken > or at least it would allow us to set email filters to properly sort the > emails and gauge how much effort to put into interacting with the review. I think that's already covered by the existing T&S, though. _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
