(Request/propose) license change
We'll take this up at the next TC39 meeting, I don't think you need a petition.
But since you have no plan to use the spec outside of the current license, may I ask what is driving you to post multiple times about it to es-discuss, talk about a petition, etc.? It seems overwrought.
Anyway, we your faithful TC39ers will take this up with Ecma people. It has been an issue recently with W3C too, where tantek at mozilla.com has been championing CC0.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
Anyway, we your faithful TC39ers will take this up with Ecma people.
That sounds great!
It has been an issue recently with W3C too, where tantek at mozilla.com has been championing CC0.
FWIW, rationale for this basically boils down to making it easy for people to do whatever they can think of with the specification and keep the organization in charge of the standardization effort honest:
dbaron.org/log/20130522-w3c-licensing, annevankesteren.nl/2013/03/zero, wiki.mozilla.org/Standards/license
What do you mean by a post with only "Nope"?
To Ecma International: Release the ECMAScript specification under Creative Commons Attribution 1.0+ / Open Web Foundation License 0.8+
[Rearranging your thread to have proper order - please don't top-post.]
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:37 PM, <musicdenotation at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Brendan Eich
musicdenotation at gmail.com <mailto:musicdenotation at gmail.com> September 3, 2013 8:15 AM
The first post was to outline the issue. I had to repost many times to gain attention and explain and suggest solutions.
Nope.
What do you mean by a post with only "Nope"?
He meant "nope, you didn't have to do that, and that's very rude and disruptive behavior".
Has the specification licensing issue been discussed at the last TC39 conference yet? What is the results?
First, I should not have changed the thread's name. That mail I wrote on a keypad mobile phone in a hurry, and so I was too lazy to write the entire original thread's name. Second, I have no plan to distribute the specification outside of the current license's scope. I am doing that as part of the JavaScript/ECMAScript community. It certainly sounds glorified, but I'm not the kind of guy you think, that's why I first raised the issue here and not by directly contacting Ecma. I need the support of you and other ECMAScript designers to convince Ecma International. Let's start a petition. To Ecma International: Release the ECMAScript specification under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 / Open Web Foundation License 1.0