Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 22nd Sep 2007 18:42 UTC, submitted by Rahul
The Microsoft Permissive License, one of two licenses the software maker submitted to the Open Source Initiative for approval as open-source licenses in August, is unlikely to be approved in its current form. There have been two principle objections to the license from the open-source community, Michael Tiemann, the president of OSI, told eWEEK in an interview here at the annual Gartner Open Source Summit on Sept. 20. The first objection is that the use of the word 'permissive' in the license title implies an expectation that the license does not meet. The second complaint is that the MS-PL is incompatible with a large number of other open-source licenses, he said.
Permalink for comment 273454
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-06-29
These are two shitty arguments, as far as I'm concerned.
The first argument at least has some logic behind it, and even though I don't find it a rather good argument, a point does get made. It is preferable if a license's name corresponds to its content - but is that really that big of a deal? I mean, are 'GPL' and 'MIT License' descriptive?
The second argument is where they get really overboard. Incompatible? What? As if the GPL is compatible! Compatibility is a two-way street in my book, and in that respect, the GPL is anything but compatible.
Weird arguments.