Re: Licensing

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Rigo Wenning wrote:
> 
> Neither a testsuite nor a specification trying to achieve 
> interoperability is an open-source project.

No, but test suites are imported into open source projects and embedded 
into automated test systems as part of open source projects, and thus need 
to fulfill the conditions needed for open source projects. (This also 
applies to closed-source projects, though it is not an issue in this 
instance since they don't have to republish the tests.)


> Do you think you can have a FIPS-140 certification that you can build 
> yourself and everybody can just alter and run?

These are not certification test suites.


> So Bert is right, lets wait for the requests and think about new 
> solutions if the old ones don't work anymore.

We have three requests now, one from Anne (Opera), one from me (Google), 
and one from David (Mozilla). How many more would you like?


On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Rigo Wenning wrote:
> >
> > Yes. I'm saying that I would not be willing to license my tests to the 
> > W3C under a different license than the 3-clause BSD, MIT, or Apache v2 
> > licenses.
> 
> By doing so, you're not compliant to any of the licenses you mention 
> anymore. So Google would have to refuse your tests too.

This is incorrect, and shows a somewhat fundamental misunderstanding of 
copyright and license law.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 10 January 2008 21:39:07 UTC