Larry,
I think that there is a broad consensus that a new attempt at license categorization should be undertaken. However, I think it is fair to say that everyone believes that such a process will take a significant amount of time to initiate, and run to completion. And we all need to recognize that any new process has no more chance of achieving unanimity than the previous attempts. In the meantime, the proposal here is to make a very modest clean-up of the licensing landing page to help OSS adopters. We are not reinventing anything, or taking any new positions as an organization. We are simply leveraging the work that was done previously. I acknowledge that the previous effort had its own set of controversies, but it has been the position of the OSI for several years now that these are the classifications we have. I certainly sympathize with all those who feel strongly about their licenses of choice. But being prevented from editing our licensing landing page for another year or two does not sound very enticing either. Now I'll say it publicly: I formally object to any attempt by OSI to pretend that the current list of "recommended licenses" has any value or validity, and I request that you NOT patch it by putting useless explanations around it. Please start a meaningful community process to develop license selection guidelines and explanations of the differences among licenses, and leave the politics and biases on the cutting room floor.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
