Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> John Cowan writes: > > With respect, Russ, that's bassackwards. Collectively if not individually, > > the members of the list have far more free man-hours than you do. You > > should pass submissions straight on to the list and let one or more of > > us shoot them down if they are obvious losers. > > Okay, unless list members have an objection, that's how I'll handle > submissions in the future. I wondered why the list has only been seeing submissions of high quality licenses. We used to more commonly see all kinds of OSD violations in the submitted licenses. (I thought the world was getting smarter about open source. Ah well.) I agree the list members could function as first-line review for licenses, AS LONG AS THEY REMEMBER THIS: We are ambassadors for open source. We want more open source. And those proposing licenses are newbies, not converts. Be gentle. I think Russ started being first-line contact back when clearly bad licenses were very likely to get flamed. That became a big turn-off to the "suits" bringing licenses to license-discuss. We don't even need someone volunteering "that I would never use such a license." It is adequate to explain the violation if you think there is one, and point them to the rationale at www.opensource.org. If they want to follow-up, then that is the time for continuing a further detailed discussion. Forrest -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
