On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 09:33:03 -0800 Luis Villa <[email protected]> wrote: > - Any comments on what information is/isn't presented?
Maybe a link to the license steward's FAQ, if any (perhaps with some appropriate disclaimer that the OSI does not necessarily endorse anything in such FAQs)? This will only be relevant to a few licenses but some of them are among the more widely used ones. > - Obviously this information will not all be available for all > licenses. In those cases, should we simply omit reference to the > information, or should we say something like "Canonical text: the > canonical text is no longer available" or "OSI discussion: this > license was approved before OSI's current mail archive system, and so > the discussion is no longer available"? I think the latter. Agreed. (Re the first example there are some cases where there really never was a canonical text, so that might be an appropriate statement for such cases.) > - MOST IMPORTANTLY: Any volunteers to gather more information for more > licenses? I offer to volunteer to the extent I have time. :) - RF _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
