On 17/11/14 15:02, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> As long as the core vote counting and verification bits are open source
> and can be externally verified then one vendor providing more vote
> planning aids, analytics, financial tracking and collaboration tools are
> part of their comprehensive suite as
Gerv,
Without knowing how OSET intends to design their software or what vendors
provide today it¹s hard for me to say.
As long as the core vote counting and verification bits are open source
and can be externally verified then one vendor providing more vote
planning aids, analytics, financial tra
On 14/11/14 19:55, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
> In our case the majority of the software being evaluated for open
> sourcing is framework and utility functions that we believe would
> provide value to our community. We wish to insure that this framework
> remains open source and commonly used but that
, November 14, 2014 at 11:06 AM
To: License Discuss
mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>>
Subject: [License-discuss] Why CAVO Recommends GPLv3
To: License-Discuss@ [This email is CC-BY.]
The California Association of Voting Officials (CAVO) asked me to help them
evaluate FOSS licenses for el
To: License-Discuss@ [This email is CC-BY.]
The California Association of Voting Officials (CAVO) asked me to help them
evaluate FOSS licenses for election software. Below is my article for the
CAVO newsletter.
You can read the entire CAVO newsletter at
http://www.cavo-us.org/Newsletter/n
5 matches
Mail list logo
