Subject: RE: License Approval Committee
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:40:48 -0700

Just to be clear, the OSI Board of Directors has sole authority to
approve or disapprove licenses.  That is essential to retain our
certification mark.

The License Approval Committee recommends only.  Not to minimize your
responsibility one bit, though....  The Board is quite likely to follow
your advice, particularly if the committee becomes effective at
screening and analyzing licenses.  Thanks for volunteering.  (Anyone who
doesn't step back 3 feet is a volunteer!)  

/Larry Rosen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Jarrell [mailto:don@digitalthinkinginc.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 9:19 AM
> To: Lawrence E. Rosen; Russell Nelson
> Cc: OS-discuss
> Subject: RE: License Approval Committee
> 
> 
> An interesting turn of events.  While I would probably
> not consider myself qualified to vote for a license's
> getting the mark, I offer a couple of questions to consider.
> 
> - What is the standard by which votes are interpreted 
> as "approval" ?  Absence of any objection ? That's a 
> pretty high-standard given the open constituency of the
> list.  Number of nay votes ? Number or percentage of yea
> votes ?  Kind of fuzzy.  
> 
> - If there is some metric based upon list population, 
> could/should those who would recuse themselves from the 
> voting - for whatever reason - be removed from that 
> population count ?
> 
> - Could list members whose bent is revealed to be
> inconsistent with the OSI/OSD be booted from the list ?
> Could they become non-voting viewers ?
> 
> - Is there a secondary review by the Board (like ruling 
> notwithstanding verdict) ?
> 
> - After reading the new certification page again, I
> wonder if the all-list-member review could be better
> as a _screening_ process, prior to Board review of the 
> short-list where actual "approval" and "certification" are conferred.
> 
> I do believe in the value of the mark as currently conferred, 
> but with this new approach, I am less sure what it will mean.
> 
> Cheers.     dj 
> 
> ******************************************************** 
> Don B Jarrell                don@digitalthinkinginc.com 
> Digital Thinking Inc.        512 266 7126   home-office 
> www.digitalthinkinginc.com   972 467 6793          cell 
> ******************************************************** 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Russell Nelson [mailto:nelson@crynwr.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 9:45 AM
> > To: license-discuss@opensource.org
> > Subject: License Approval Committee
> > 
> > 
> > Hi, y'all.  We have changed the license approval process.  
> I've asked 
> > Steve to upload the changed page, which is currently at 
> > http://russnelson.com/certification_mark.html.  Part of this change 
> > gives license-discuss more authority.  You're being 
> deputized to serve 
> > as the License Approval Committee.  License approval 
> requests now go 
> > directly to you.
> > 
> > I'd like it if somebody would step forward to serve as the 
> Committee 
> > chair.  Your duties are to collect a yea/nay recommendation and 
> > forward it to me once the discussion on a license dies down.
> > 
> > --
> > --My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com  | If war is the 
> > answer, then
> > Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | the question 
> > must be truly
> > 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | horrific.
> > Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | 
> > --
> > license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
> --
> license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
> 

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3