Subject: Re: Change ot topic, back to OVPL
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 01:00:16 -0400

Alex Bligh writes:
 > To be clear, even if my client DID NOT want what you call the OVPL-specific
 > terms, the changes to the CDDL would be necessary.

I agree!  So let's get them into the CDDL.

 > > If the license contains
 > > terms that other parties in the open source community would object to,
 > > we'll tell the submittor.

Specifically, I was thinking about the FSF and Debian-Legal folks,
both of which have their own criteria for considering a license to be
an open source license.

-- 
--my blog is at     blog.russnelson.com         | with some experience 
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok |     you know what to do.
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | with more experience
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |                       |     you know what not to do.