Chris Rowson wrote: > > I can also understand a general unwillingness to disconnect software > > from the license under which it is made available; I don't see > > what's gained from splitting them. Why would you wish to be able to > > ban non-Open source products from tendering? > > > You wouldn't want to ban non-open source products from tendering. > Tenders are usually assessed on a weighted point basis however, and > as we have discussed, some of the features of an open-source licence > make that kind of licence more desirable that a proprietary licence. > I just wondered whether or not declaring open-source as a product > would make it difficult to assign a desirable weighting to an > open-source licence in the tender process?
The obvious way round that would be to specify those benefits, rather than the license. That, I would have thought, would be the better way to make sure you get the benefits than to try to compile a list of licenses which provide them. Maybe I'm just jaded by the amount of times I've asked "What's the actual problem you're trying to solve here?" having spent several hours debugging someone else's daft idea :) -- Avi -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
