Re: LSB Telephone Conference this Wednesday March 1st, 2000
(list changed from conference call people to lsb-spec).
> We should talk about an appropriate license that reflects the
> community nature of the project. Something like the LDP or OSWG
> licensing.
Yes, we've talked about the LSB license before and I've been wanting a
clarification that we are going for a license of the LDP/OSWG/&c sort
(there was some pushback on the last conference call; I don't know
whether that was a strong opinion but I feel strongly that we need a
license which lets people use/modify the text of the standard - with
stricter limits on use of the name). The current candidate seems to
be the FHS license (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.0/fhs-license.html)
which would be fine with me.
Reply to: