Re: Finalizing license

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Tue Aug 19 2003 - 19:53:30 CDT

Hi Arthur,

|>the idea of using simple GPL, but including the revision log
|>requirement as a membership condition for our planned future Open
|>Voting Consortium?

Arthur Keller <> wrote:
|I personally think that this is insufficient. Read my other post on
|this matter.

OK. I had not recognized from your previous posts that you felt the OVC
charter approach was insufficient. But since you do, I think we should
just take it as a given that our license will include Doug's clause, or
something much like it that achieves its intended purpose (I'm just
thinking here that the FSF will possibly recommend a slight change in
language without interfering with the intent).

As I mentioned, I don't think it is a deal breaker if FSF has
reservations with the change. I'd just like their opinion. And I would
also like to seek OSI approval along the way; I'd be happy to handle
that detail. But there is no reason that seeking that should delay any
of the concrete development... or even more importantly, the grant
applications[*] and political lobbying.

Yours, David...

[*] You had mentioned that you felt writing the GPL into the NSF
proposal would be a good thing to do. How does finalizing our "EVMPL"
fit into that? Would it be OK to just call EVMPL1.0,
GPL+Jones-clause... but conceivably have a EVMPL1.1 with slightly
adjusted language?

 mertz@  _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: \_\_\_\_    n o
gnosis  _/_/             Postmodern Enterprises            \_\_
.cx    _/_/                                                 \_\_  d o
      _/_/_/ IN A WORLD W/O WALLS, THERE WOULD BE NO GATES \_\_\_ z e
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Sun Aug 31 23:17:13 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 23:17:18 CDT