On Dec 16, 2011, at 2:53 PM, Stephie King wrote:
This definitely conflicts with the GPL, and may not qualify as open source.
One does not lead to the other...
___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
Tentative title: Are 69 Open Source Licenses Enough?
My questions:
Do we really need that many open source licenses?
Is there any way to consolidate some of them, which would make life
simpler for a whole lot of people? Or does each one of these licenses
serve an essential purpose for someone
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, Robin 'Roblimo' Miller wrote:
Tentative title: Are 69 Open Source Licenses Enough?
69 is way too few. In my little research of just around 600 man pages I
found over 100 different licenses -- mostly due to slight wording
changes.
My questions:
Do we really need that
On 12/19/2011 10:42 AM, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
69 is way too few. In my little research of just around 600 man pages I
found over 100 different licenses -- mostly due to slight wording
changes.
Fedora is tracking 300+ different FOSS licenses.
~tom
==
Fedora Project
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:57:04AM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
On 12/19/2011 10:42 AM, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
69 is way too few. In my little research of just around 600 man pages I
found over 100 different licenses -- mostly due to slight wording
changes.
Fedora is tracking 300+
On 12/19/2011 11:57 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
Fedora is tracking 300+ different FOSS licenses.
I got my list here: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical
A note: this is not an article with a slant. I'm asking questions, and
your answers (hopefully by private email, hint hint, or by
Wow! I must add that I do not think I would have seen a comment like this
posted by Bruce Perens 10 years ago. Of course, I completely agree with the
sentiment.
Rod Dixon
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 16, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Bruce Perens br...@perens.com wrote:
OSI should deny certification
7 matches
Mail list logo
