Hi all, I want to keep this question at the forefront of discussion; the next Federal Source Code Policy group meeting is this Thursday, and if this solution is acceptable to OSI, then this can become a part of the Federal policy going forwards.
Thanks, Cem Karan > -----Original Message----- > From: Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 11:23 AM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: Possible alternative was: Re: U.S. Army Research Laboratory Open > Source License (ARL OSL) Version 0.4.1 > > All, the folks at code.mil came up with what may be a really, really good > idea; see > https://github.com/deptofdefense/code.mil/blob/master/Proposal/CONTRIBUTING.md. > > The basic idea is simple; when the Government releases code, it's in the > public domain (likely CC0). The project owners select an OSI-approved > license, and will only accept contributions to the project under their > chosen > license[1]. Over time the code base becomes a mixture, some of which is > under > CC0, and some of which is under the OSI-approved license. I've talked with > ARL's lawyers, and they are satisfied with this solution. Would OSI be > happy > with this solution? That is, would OSI recognize the projects as being > truly > Open Source, right from the start? The caveat is that some projects will be > 100% CC0 at the start, and can only use the chosen Open Source license on > those contributions that have copyright attached. Note that Government > projects that wish to make this claim would have to choose their license and > announce it on the project site so that everyone knows what they are > licensing > their contributions under, which is the way that OSI can validate that the > project is keeping its end of the bargain at the start. > > If this will satisfy OSI, then I will gladly withdraw the ARL OSL from > consideration. If there are NASA or other Government folks on here, would > this solution satisfy your needs as well? > > Thanks, > Cem Karan > > [1] There is also a form certifying that the contributor has the right to do > so, etc. The Army Research Laboratory's is at > https://github.com/USArmyResearchLab/ARL-Open-Source-Guidance-and-Instructions/blob/master/ARL%20Form%20-%20266.pdf, > and is, unfortunately, only able to be opened in Adobe Acrobat. We're > working > to fix that, but there are other requirements that will take some time.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
