On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 05:31:17PM -0400, "Andrés G. Aragoneses" wrote: > Noah Slater wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 09:54:06PM -0500, "Andrés G. Aragoneses" wrote: > >> So, should I start in this mailing-list the discussion and elaborate on > >> the motivations of why this new license is needed and why the existing > >> licenses do not fit with this model? Or should I contact other FSF staff > >> via other means? Any FSF member reading? > > > > I'm an associate member, and I know some staffers. Does that count? ;) > > Perfect, I invite you to participate on the discussion, as I posted the > ideas in a new thread (following advice from Stefano and Alessandro). > Could you also tell the staffers you know to post their opinions?
Well, the staffers I know are already on this list. Hey Matt! > > My advice to you would be to email [email protected] and see what they > > think. > > Well, I think I already contacted them via this email, but I was replied > by only one person (which turns out to belong to one of the "reluctant" > groups I talk about in the new thread) and I think this needs to be > discussed in a global way like a mailing list. Hmm, it is going to involve some diplomacy with them if you want it accepted. > As far as I understand, OSI is more oriented to less-restrictive open > source licenses, right? Then I guess they wouldn't be very interested. Likewise, you will want OSI approval if you want mindshare for your licence. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
