Date
1 - 4 of 4
Meeting minutes are posted
|
J Lovejoy
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2015-01-08
Thanks for the great discussion today! The next Legal Call will be on Jan 22 Unless anyone raises an objection via the mailing list, we will continue with our same schedule in 2015: Thursdays at 1pm Eastern Time, alternating Thursdays with the Business Group thanksl |
|
|
|
dmg <dmg@...>
Hi Jilayne,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
i looked into the Sleepycat license. You asked if others use it (I'll look into it, I think i have seen it used by others). but... One interesting aspect of this license is that because the copyright holder is no longer SleepyCat the current license in SPDX does not match the current text of the license (used in the Berkeley DB package). So the Sleepycat license should be changed to a template (I am going to catch up on that this week, I promise). So we can say that Oracle is using the Sleepycat license with the name of Sleepcat changed to Oracle :) On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:27 PM, J Lovejoy <opensource@...> wrote:
http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Minutes/2015-01-08 |
|
|
|
dmg
Hi Jilayne,
i looked into the Sleepycat license. You asked if others use it (I'll look into it, I think i have seen it used by others). but... One interesting aspect of this license is that because the copyright holder is no longer SleepyCat the current license in SPDX does not match the current text of the license (used in the Berkeley DB package). So the Sleepycat license should be changed to a template (I am going to catch up on that this week, I promise). So we can say that Oracle is using the Sleepycat license with the name of Sleepcat changed to Oracle :) -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org |
|
|
|
J Lovejoy
HI Daniel,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Thanks for the follow-up. That’s helpful to know. I think we will need to do, along the lines of our discussion on the call this week, is to review these cases individually and then come up with a recommendation on how (if at all) we’d like to change things, e.g., in this case, maybe we break apart the 3 components of Sleepycat and templatize, as you mention below. But for any license that is OSI-approved, the additional step needs to then be to take that suggestion (and all our supporting research, facts, etc.) and let them know what we are thinking and consider how we might ensure that the work OSI and SPDX has done remain aligned. Thanks, Jilayne SPDX Legal Team co-lead opensource@... On Jan 8, 2015, at 6:51 PM, dmg <dmg@...> wrote: |
|
|