Subject: Re: SocialText license discussion--call for closure of arguments
From: Matthew Flaschen <>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:30:05 -0500
Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:30:05 -0500
Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Timothy McIntyre (
>> Essentially, I think the SocialText license should be approved for the 
>> same reasons that the OSI approved the Attribution Assurance License. 
> You mean, for the "reason" of having not, at that time, yet gotten around
> to writing OSD provision #10?  That reason would seem to no longer apply.

Not to mention the subtle yet significant differences between AAL and
GAP that I reviewed earlier

Matthew Flaschen

["application/pgp-signature" not shown]