tives of OSI have approached me to
> know if Debian is interested into joining. I'd like to discuss with you
> such a possibility.
Thanks to anyone who has given feedback on this matter, both here on
list and in private mail. With the help of your feedback, I've now
decided to go ahead and
On 21/02/12 19:24, David Weinehall wrote:
A way to solve these three issues, and solve the license proliferation issue
while at it, might be to start from scratch.
Yeah. And that solution will work well for the Middle East, too :-)
BTW, someone asked for evidence that people involved with the
* Luk Claes [120222 07:21]:
> Not sure why you think anything needs to be reviewed on debian-legal as
> it is just a list of random people commenting on random legal issues and
> has no direct say whatsoever about any legal or other issue in Debian...
Things do not need review on debian-legal. It
David Weinehall
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 01:08:28PM +, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > - It would be difficult to get wide enough agreement on exactly which
> > licenses were "bad enough" to be revoked.
>
> This might be tricky, agreed. Lucky for them Debian has got a pretty
> solid good/bad l
Jose Luis Rivas
> On 02/21/2012 12:32 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > We would need to start by identifying the licenses that we care enough
> > about to demand that they be purged. I suspect that list may be of zero
> > size, mostly on the "care enough about" front.
>
> This is what I asked for bef
On 02/22/2012 02:09 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 09:36:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>>
>> I do think we should, if we join, state publicly (in whatever press
>> release we generate announcing our membership) that Debian is not adopting
>> the OSI license review process
Le Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 09:36:28AM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>
> I do think we should, if we join, state publicly (in whatever press
> release we generate announcing our membership) that Debian is not adopting
> the OSI license review process for Debian and that Debian will continue to
> condu
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 01:08:28PM +, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 21/02/12 10:08, MJ Ray wrote:
>> Words are cheap. When will OSI revoke some of the bloopers?
>
> Philip also made the same point. You'd need to ask them. I can speculate
> wildly:
>
> - They currently have no process for revoc
Jose Luis Rivas writes:
> This is what I asked for before, but what MJ Ray gave me was just one
> license and Josselin didn't answered. And MJ didn't saw a reason for
> making a list.
> There's a lot of "there must be a purge of licenses" arguments, but
> which ones?
Yes, I agree. If we have c
On 02/21/2012 12:32 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Or make joining OSI conditional upon some sort of purge of icky licenses
>> on their side.
>
> We would need to start by identifying the licenses that we care enough
> about to demand that they be purged. I suspect that list may be of zero
> size, m
Jeremiah Foster writes:
> I think there is room to join OSI as an observer of some kind and
> explicitly say to them that they don't get to use a Debian stamp of
> approval in their marketing material.
Yes, this.
I think it's fine, and even a good idea, for Debian to join closely
related projec
On Feb 21, 2012, at 12:29, Philip Hands wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:56:02 +, Gervase Markham
> wrote:
> ...
>> If you read the OSI discussion lists, you'll certainly find senior
>> figures in that movement regretting previous decisions, e.g. about
>> particular license approvals. Havi
On 21/02/12 10:08, MJ Ray wrote:
Words are cheap. When will OSI revoke some of the bloopers?
Philip also made the same point. You'd need to ask them. I can speculate
wildly:
- They currently have no process for revocation of status;
- Most of the bad ones are hardly used at all, making it
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:56:02 +, Gervase Markham wrote:
...
> If you read the OSI discussion lists, you'll certainly find senior
> figures in that movement regretting previous decisions, e.g. about
> particular license approvals. Having groups like Debian involved seems
> to me that it will
Gervase Markham
> If you read the OSI discussion lists, you'll certainly find senior
> figures in that movement regretting previous decisions, e.g. about
> particular license approvals. Having groups like Debian involved seems
> to me that it will reduce the likelihood of more of that happening
On 13/02/12 17:40, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Although I'd like to hear your comments before deciding, my advice is to
accept the invitation and have Debian join OSI. My rationale for that is
twofold:
Mozilla is becoming an OSI affiliate, and I am Mozilla's representative
to the OSI. I would lo
Jose Luis Rivas
> On 02/17/2012 06:11 PM, MJ Ray wrote:
> > http://people.debian.org/~mjr/legal/fsf-osi-list-diff.txt
> > shows the ones where OSI and FSF disagree, but what's the
> > point of knowing which are involved? Basically, OSI has
> > aided proliferation.
> >
> The point of my question
On 02/17/2012 06:11 PM, MJ Ray wrote:
> Jose Luis Rivas
>> Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the
>> OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) That way
>> every one else knows which licenses are you talking about exactly.
>
> http://people.debian.
Philip Hands
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:41:10 +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Jose Luis Rivas
> > > Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the
> > > OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) [...]
> > http://people.debian.org/~mjr/legal/fsf-osi-list-diff.txt
On Sat, 2012-02-18 at 09:31 +, Philip Hands wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:41:10 +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Jose Luis Rivas
> > > Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the
> > > OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) That way
> > > every one el
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:41:10 +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Jose Luis Rivas
> > Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the
> > OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) That way
> > every one else knows which licenses are you talking about exactly.
>
> http:
Jose Luis Rivas
> Just to give context to your email, could you provide a list with the
> OSI-approved licenses that you call non-free? (Maybe a link) That way
> every one else knows which licenses are you talking about exactly.
http://people.debian.org/~mjr/legal/fsf-osi-list-diff.txt
shows the
On 02/17/2012 08:39 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> This looks very good on paper, but as others have mentioned, the OSI has
> taken various decisions that were in complete contradiction with the
> Debian project, especially on accepting non-free licenses as “open
> source”. While it would be nice to
Le lundi 13 février 2012 à 18:40 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
> Dear project members,
> as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
> is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
> already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approa
Philip Hands wrote: [...]
> So whatever we might think about the merits of the "Open Source" term,
> it hardly seems like a step forward to render such references into
> hanging links just at the point where policy makers are starting to get
> the message.
I agree with Phil. That is why my prefe
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:36:21 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:06:56PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I would be disappointed if this happened. The Open Source Initiative
> > failed, for reasons that aren't important at this point - they should
> > belatedly accept that and
Stefano Zacchiroli
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:06:56PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I would be disappointed if this happened. The Open Source Initiative
> > failed, for reasons that aren't important at this point - they should
> > belatedly accept that and merge its corporation into SPI or another
>
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 06:41:04PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hmmm. I *hope* they manage to achieve some of this, but I'll admit to
> being skeptical. There's been a lot more heat than light in
> discussions I've been seen in and around the OSI in the last few
> years. It would be nice to see t
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 06:40:08PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>Dear project members,
> as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
>is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
>already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approached m
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:06:56PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> I would be disappointed if this happened. The Open Source Initiative
> failed, for reasons that aren't important at this point - they should
> belatedly accept that and merge its corporation into SPI or another
> suitable continuing vehicle
Stefano Zacchiroli
> as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
> is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
> already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approached me to
> know if Debian is interested into joining. I'd like to discus
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 06:40:08PM +0100]:
> Dear project members,
> as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
> is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
> already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approached
On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 18:40 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
[...]
> Although I'd like to hear your comments before deciding, my advice is to
> accept the invitation and have Debian join OSI.
[...]
+1
--
Ben Hutchings
Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers. - Leonard Brandwein
signature.
On 02/13/2012 01:10 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> - OSI history is intertwined with ours and we share a common heritage:
> the DFSG. Having the actors interested in such a document work more
> closely together is, IMHO, desirable.
>
> (As a side note on this: ours and OSI's version of DFSG
Dear project members,
as you might have heard post-FOSDEM, the Open Source Initiative (OSI)
is opening up to an affiliate membership structure [1,2]. As I've
already mentioned in [3], representatives of OSI have approached me to
know if Debian is interested into joining. I'd like to discuss with
35 matches
Mail list logo
