| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
OSI Approves Microsoft License SubmissionsOSI Approves Microsoft License SubmissionsPosted Oct 16, 2007 17:14 UTC (Tue) by einstein (subscriber, #2052)In reply to: OSI Approves Microsoft License Submissions by sayler Parent article: OSI Approves Microsoft License Submissions
Didn't the original license submission by microsoft contain some pretty odious restrictions, such as a windoze-only requirement and some other restrictions that were completely alien to OSS? IFF those nasty clauses were removed, I could technically understand granting the approval, but I still have to wonder, what is microsoft up to? Why yet another new license, when there are already too many?
(Log in to post comments)
OSI Approves Microsoft License Submissions Posted Oct 16, 2007 17:31 UTC (Tue) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] einstein:No, not on the particular two licences submitted to OSI. You're thinking of some of the other ones, Microsoft Limited Public License (Ms-LPL), Microsoft Limited Reciprocal License (Ms-LRL), and Microsoft Reference License, which are clearly proprietary but were not submitted. The ones submitted and (I gather) approved were Microsoft Reciprocal License (Ms-RL) and Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL). Microsoft have a "Shared Source Licenses" page housing all of the above licences. Rick Moen
OSI Approves Microsoft License Submissions Posted Oct 16, 2007 17:51 UTC (Tue) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] I see - Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
||||||||||||