Nicholas Weinstock has made an important point here: commercial entities rely on the OSI list of approved licenses when making contracts. That's good for the OSI.
They will only continue to rely on that list if they understand how the list evolves. Best, Myrle On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 8:09 PM Bradley M. Kuhn <bk...@ebb.org> wrote: > Nicholas Matthew Neft Weinstock of Qualcomm wrote: > > Without commenting on WHETHER any licenses should be > > deprecated/disapproved/legacy, nor on WHICH licenses are appropriate > > candidates, I would like to suggest a consideration related to HOW to do > > so. > > +1 (… and this may be the first time in my entire life I've ever agreed > with > Qualcomm about anything, so that's saying something … ☺) > > -- bkuhn > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >
_______________________________________________ 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
