On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 2:52 PM, joel jaeggli <joelja@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/23/16 12:12 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> "open source != BSD". There are better licenses out there - notably >> apache 2.0 is pretty clear, legally, in places where BSD is not. I am >> also under the impression that GPLv2 has an implicit patent grant >> (which would be a real boon in clearing some matters up long before it >> would ever become an issue). >> >> But IANAL. Have you taken this proposed policy up with OSI? >> >> https://opensource.org/ > The statement addresses the use of and obligations of contributors to > repositories. It does not, nor does it intend to change the licensing > terms of contributions, present in bcp 78,79 and the TLP. The non-answer seems to be that OSI has not been consulted. >> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:36 AM, IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> The IESG has observed that many working groups work with open source >>> repositories even for their work on specifications. That's great, and >>> we're happy to see this development, as it fits well the working style >>> of at least some of our working groups. This style is also likely to be >>> more popular in the future. >>> >>> As always, we'd like to understand areas where we can either be helpful >>> in bringing in some new things such as tooling, or where we need to >>> integrate better between the repository world and the IETF process. As >>> an example of the latter, we're wondering whether it would be helpful to >>> have a standard boilerplate for these repositories with respect to the >>> usual copyright and other matters. The intent is for such text to be >>> placed in a suitable file (e.g., "CONTRIBUTING"), probably along with >>> some additional information that is already present in these files in >>> many repositories. The idea is that people should treat, e.g., text >>> contributions to a draft-foo.xml in a repository much in the same way as >>> they treat text contributions on the list, at least when it comes to >>> copyright, IPR, and other similar issues. >>> >>> We have worked together with the IETF legal team and few key experts >>> from the IETF who are actively using these repositories, and suggest the >>> following text. >>> >>> We're looking to make a decision on this matter on our January 19th, >>> 2017 IESG Telechat, and would appreciate feedback before then. This >>> message will be resent after the holiday period is over to make sure it >>> is noticed. Please send comments to the IESG (iesg@xxxxxxxx) by 2017-01-17. >>> >>> The IESG >>> >>> —— >>> >>> This repository relates to activities in the Internet Engineering Task >>> Force(IETF). All material in this repository is considered Contributions >>> to the IETF Standards Process, as defined in the intellectual property >>> policies of IETF currently designated as BCP 78 >>> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp78), BCP 79 >>> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp79) and the IETF Trust Legal >>> Provisions (TLP) Relating to IETF Documents >>> (http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). >>> >>> Any edit, commit, pull-request, comment or other change made to this >>> repository constitutes Contributions to the IETF Standards Process. You >>> agree to comply with all applicable IETF policies and procedures, >>> including, BCP 78, 79, the TLP, and the TLP rules regarding code >>> components (e.g. being subject to a Simplified BSD License) in >>> Contributions. >>> >> >> > > -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org