Peter Saint-Andre wrote: <snip>
It seems there are two issues here:
1. Code ownership / stewardship
2. Code licensing / terms of use
I really meant to raise issue #1. Is there a legitimate role for the JSF as a trusted third party for open-source code developed in the Jabber community? It seems to me that the JSF could do this no matter what the code license (terms of use) is.
My experience with open-source projects is that they are strongest where people are encouraged to entrust copyrights to a central body. Of course, this means that people must trust that the body will not abuse their possession of the copyrights.
I think it is a really positive thing that people now *want* to assign their rights to the JSF. This means it has become an organisation which is well-regarded and trusted by the Jabber community.
A subsidiary issue is whether we might want to develop JOSL 1.1 as one license that would enable the JSF to function as what Larry Lessig calls an "intellectual property conservancy".
Personally, I'm a strong advocate of "dual-licensing" arrangements, such as that followed by mozilla.org (eg. Mozilla is provided under the MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license). I think these provide a good balance between encouraging commercial innovation, and ensuring code is returned to the OSS community.
A JOSL/GPL dual-license for JSF-managed code would give people the maximum flexibility to decide how they want their development work treated by the community. From this point of view, I think JOSL 1.1 would be a welcome advance.
-- GuruJ.
_______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://jabberstudio.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
