3 ms·

> BTW, the OSI people on their mailing list weren't convinced that the license is conformant (during the grace period) in 2008, 2009, or 2013. Thanks, that's i

by geofft 6y ago

> BTW, the OSI people on their mailing list weren't convinced that the license is conformant (during the grace period) in 2008, 2009, or 2013. Thanks, that's interesting. If you happen to have the links to the discussion it'd be worth figuring out what they thought was nonconformant (and whether it can be fixed).

nsajko 6y ago
One issue seems to be that it wasn't seen as desirable to promote something that is not source-available under whatever license, which conflicts with the main idea of the TGPPL of keeping the software closed-source during the grace period. Another issue was ensuring the source becomes available after the grace period as intended. I may be wrong, though, as I haven't read even half of the extensive discussions on this topic. OSI board meetings discussing TGPPL briefly: https://opensource.org/minutes20090205 https://opensource.org/minutes20090205 https://opensource.org/minutes20090304 https://opensource.org/minutes20090304 https://opensource.org/minutes20090401 https://opensource.org/minutes20090401 Relevant mailing list threads: Dec 2008 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2008-December/000461.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Jan 2009 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2009-January/000477.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Feb 2009 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2009-February/000499.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Jul 2013 threads: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-July/018425.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-July/018443.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... Dec 2013 message: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-December/018782.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... Jul 2018 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2018-July/020029.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... You might also be slightly interested in this small Wikipedia page section relevant to the motivation for the TGPPL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-source_software#Delayed_open-sourcing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-sourc...

by geofft 6y ago

nsajko 6y ago

One issue seems to be that it wasn't seen as desirable to promote something that is not source-available under whatever license, which conflicts with the main idea of the TGPPL of keeping the software closed-source during the grace period. Another issue was ensuring the source becomes available after the grace period as intended. I may be wrong, though, as I haven't read even half of the extensive discussions on this topic. OSI board meetings discussing TGPPL briefly: https://opensource.org/minutes20090205 https://opensource.org/minutes20090205 https://opensource.org/minutes20090304 https://opensource.org/minutes20090304 https://opensource.org/minutes20090401 https://opensource.org/minutes20090401 Relevant mailing list threads: Dec 2008 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2008-December/000461.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Jan 2009 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2009-January/000477.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Feb 2009 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2009-February/000499.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.... Jul 2013 threads: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-July/018425.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-July/018443.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... Dec 2013 message: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2013-December/018782.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... Jul 2018 thread: https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/2018-July/020029.html https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists... You might also be slightly interested in this small Wikipedia page section relevant to the motivation for the TGPPL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-source_software#Delayed_open-sourcing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_models_for_open-sourc...