> 1. LICENSE shall mean an open source (e.g., free software) license
> which allows:
> a) Any person or entity to combine the licensed product with
> anything else and release the resulting combination so
> long as he/they:
We should explicitly state that modifications are also allowed. Also,
shouldn't we more closely define "forking" as taking a copy of the sources
and starting one's own collaboration?
> b) Any person to fork. Conditions for forking shall be the
^^ shouldn't it be "may"?
> same as 1. Forking may include any utilization of any
> amount of the source code.
> LICENSE shall be perpetual, non-exclusive, and irrevocable.
>1. I propose that there shall be a single MAINTAINER, to be shall be
>elected by the majority of the members of the OODL list and liable to
>removal by the same fraction. I propose that any single decision or group
>of decisions may be reversed by a majority vote, except for the provisions
>of this document, once adopted, may be modified or extended to the extent
>allowed by applicable law by a vote of two-thirds in the affirmative.
Take out the two-thirds vote, it's too dangerous.
>5. I propose that the final, official name of OPENCARD shall be designated
>with the trademark symbol, �, and be a trademark to be owned by MAINTAINER.
Is Linux trademarked? Trademarking costs $$$ !
Besides that I agree with all of this.
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
