Hello,

Jilayne Lovejoy said on Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 09:19:54AM -0600:

Here is the next version of the license list (v1.2) that includes the
license text and some other changes discussed via email. I also updated
the "guidelines" document and listed any changes in this spreadsheet
over License List v1.1 there.

I think there is a problem line 32 of the LicenseList v1.2 file:
Column A mentions version 1.0 wheresas column B says 3.0.

I wonder if there shouldn't be a mention of the GFDL in this file as
well (with the multiple versions)? (CC are there)

Speaking of versions, I wonder whether there should'nt always be a
version mentioned, to support easily future revisions of the license not
having multiple version yet.

For dates, wouldn't it be more interesting (wrt sort, ...) to use the
ISO format: 2010-11-04 instead of the European one, which may be
confusing for non-european people.

HTH,
Bruno.
--
Open Source & Linux Profession Lead EMEA / http://opensource.hp.com
HP/Intel/Red Hat Open Source Solutions Initiative / http://www.hpintelco.net
http://www.HyPer-Linux.org http://mondorescue.org http://project-builder.org
La musique ancienne? http://www.musique-ancienne.org http://www.medieval.org