Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Bradley M. Kuhn writes:
> > It seems to me that the perl6-internals, perl6-qa, and perl6-licenses groups
> > should be able to produce additional RFCs after this. Of course, the
> > Language will be frozen, but these three groups may need to remain fluid
> > after the 14 October 2000 annoucement.
>
> I think perl6-licenses should start to move towards a decision after
> the 14th. Find something that there's a rough consensus for, write up
> the pro-s and con-s, then give it to Larry.
I wrote up nearly all the ideas brought up. I put the last RFC in just
under the wire (that was RFC: Perl6's License Should be the same as the
modified BSD license), but it was refused, sadly.
Save the RFC that didn't make it in time, I don't think there were any other
viable ideas that aren't already RFC's. So, what Larry needs to see is
there.
The only additional changes would be for legal reasons once we bring some
lawyers in.
So, I'd say the working group has submitted everything that Larry needs to
see (if the "under the wire" RFC mentioned is added).
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn
PGP signature
