Re: [unrev-II] Leadership and licenses

From: Eugene Eric Kim (
Date: Sat Jun 24 2000 - 10:02:59 PDT

  • Next message: Eugene Eric Kim: "Re: [unrev-II] Augment + categories = OHS v0.1"

    On Sat, 24 Jun 2000, Rod Welch wrote:

    > Licensing is a legal issue. At some point a lawyer will draft a document and
    > people will be asked to sign it. Typically, we need legal advice on issues of
    > notice, disclosure, rights and remedies, risks and so on. So far that is
    > lacking in the record. Second, the project needs funding to proceed
    > meaningfully. The source of the funds will have a say in the license issue.

    Drafting a new license is certainly an alternative, but one I would be
    strongly against. There are already several standard open source
    licenses, all of which have been reviewed by multiple

    No funding source will have any direct say in license issues, other than
    perhaps to choose not to fund us. As I and others (including Doug) have
    said repeatedly, we are fully and unshakeably committed to an open source
    license. That said, one issue we must certainly think about is how our
    open source license may be perceived by potential funders. For example,
    corporations may feel more comfortable funding a group developing a
    project under the BSD or MPL.

    > On 000419 Doug wrote to the seed team and suggested we work on formulating a
    > definition of knowledge management. I am not sure, but he may have mentioned
    > this previously, something to do with Bellinger. Joe Williams mentioned later
    > that Doug brought this up again at a meeting on 000504. When the boss brings up
    > the same thing over and over again, that sounds important. Yet, we get bogged
    > down in endless discussions about license, Zope, Soap, Wiki, Squeak, Slop Jock,
    > and so on, without any effort to explain how they contribute to moving from
    > information to knowledge management. On 000424 Adam Cheyer wrote to the DKR
    > team and urged that we "listen" to Doug. He did not explain how such listening
    > is established. One way might be to do the workup on KM that provides a basis
    > for a DKR. It is not enough to wave Doug's papers in air, and say, "It's all in
    > there."

    I can assure you that if Doug wanted us to define knowledge management at
    the meetings rather than discuss OHS development issues, that would have
    been at the top of the agenda. As I noted on June 15, I discuss the
    agenda with Doug before each meeting.

    That said, I think formulating a definition of knowledge management is an
    interesting and important problem, and I'd encourage you to start a
    thread on that here. I think we've already limited too much discussion
    to the physical meetings. When it's possible, we should try to work
    things out on this list.


    +=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== ===== ===+
    |       "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so they        |
    +=====  can have an excuse to drink alcohol."  --Steve Martin  ===========+

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want insight into hot IPOs, investing strategies and stocks to watch? Red Herring FREE newsletters provide strategic analysis for investors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Community email addresses: Post message: Subscribe: Unsubscribe: List owner:

    Shortcut URL to this page:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 24 2000 - 10:19:25 PDT