Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License
From: Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:23:47 -0400

Russ Nelson wrote:
> Matthew Flaschen writes:
>  > a. Is MS-PL a permissive license?  If not, should OSI ask/require that
>  > it be renamed?
>  > 
>  > I don't think it's permissive in a meaningful sense, because other
>  > permissive (as the term is generally understood in the FOSS community)
>  > licenses allow incorporating into source code works under other
>  > licenses, provided that the permissive license and copyright notice is
>  > preserved, and MS-PL does not.
>  > 
>  > Thus, I think Microsoft should rename the license.
> 
> My opinion is that we should approve it regardless of the name.

I agree with this.  However, Microsoft appears willing to rename it (I
think "Microsoft Public License" is a good replacement for "Microsoft
Permissive License"), so that would be a preferred solution.

Matt Flaschen