Alan Coopersmith <Alan.Coopersmith at Sun.COM> writes: > C. Bergstr?m wrote: >> With all due respect.. I think the OSI is more qualified than the OGB to >> determine which license(s) are suitable for an open source project. > > For an open source project, yes. For OpenSolaris, I don't necessarily agree. > If you read my proposed policy, it basically just extended the acceptable > licenses from "approved by OSI" to "approved by OSI, or is the OpenSolaris > Binary License, or, for docs/etc, is a similar type Creative Commons license", > with the flexibility for the OGB to adjust without needing a constitutional > amendment. >
That seems to be less flexibility and more a disproportionate decrease in the degree (and source) of approval required. Is this really something you forsee happening frequently enough to warrant it? -- Rich
