1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
|
Return-Path: <marco.falke@tum.de>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAC022C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 15:02:42 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from postout1.mail.lrz.de (postout1.mail.lrz.de [129.187.255.137])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ABC684
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 15:02:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lxmhs51.srv.lrz.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by postout1.mail.lrz.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3sx74J1QcWzyWr
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 17:02:40 +0200 (CEST)
Authentication-Results: postout.lrz.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
reason="pass (just generated,
assumed good)" header.d=tum.de
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tum.de; h=
content-type:content-type:subject:subject:message-id:date:date
:from:from:references:in-reply-to:received:mime-version:received
:received:received; s=postout; t=1476543759; bh=RTjFt1Ncj9X26mvd
m6fbIFu74H5HdlmYSbh6e0rY8kc=; b=vutRG+L0Ffve42Kg9rfv6Tr73NAzj4lG
t83Qy+znq9o4X6KgE0nRZZzzLwPNeLQRcGLYaauAZzoTm8cE3dVhETQW/sHNSDlH
sm85Qos/X0OY4nd3j/PQsP1734eyU5uDmWQjEGCb1+spGkY9v4XhBS/ejLCbu0si
KxxCMdN8Mzw6Hi39kwktyTZRre51aXBQxDxlxT65brIpHI4mQjHUP7xnm7vwMEYC
m0GrZd+mMRWo4rxnHdcPCfaRgNPOOMEoAYgNlihUMtlg+eueQbdm9EaKWZ2AKtis
qcOKCi/PXaCiM/1K5g1PfbSKp6cxCSIz8TPMpioU7seYgsU9zCSTDg==
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at lrz.de in lxmhs51.srv.lrz.de
X-Spam-Score: -2.792
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from postout1.mail.lrz.de ([127.0.0.1])
by lxmhs51.srv.lrz.de (lxmhs51.srv.lrz.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
port 20024)
with LMTP id tb7blAjgk0Ec for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 17:02:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by postout1.mail.lrz.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3sx7474zLfzyWd
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 17:02:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id d128so31973576wmf.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 08:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rm7iQHj0Jjqat7dP38uwQjxCLOvFPGkdKT5MV2pzOUrrkAxcRDpbm1jPls83VbSWApLv9ctKH+bPwxnMA==
X-Received: by 10.194.118.198 with SMTP id ko6mr5756848wjb.215.1476543750738;
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 08:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.1.17 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 08:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1866359.UpcIIOnrOv@strawberry>
References: <201609240636.01968.luke@dashjr.org>
<1574488.v0vhHDvJj4@strawberry>
<CAK51vgAyuW+832F7+O-ZB9pusp=si-u_gATgTJbyEXnrb08Xqg@mail.gmail.com>
<1866359.UpcIIOnrOv@strawberry>
From: Marco Falke <marco.falke@tum.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 17:02:30 +0200
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAK51vgDRngpTEtnQpwCKN8Jznj2T-HSLEkXD4Z=JiNhV1BOONg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK51vgDRngpTEtnQpwCKN8Jznj2T-HSLEkXD4Z=JiNhV1BOONg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 15:45:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 2 revival and rework
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 15:02:43 -0000
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> > My suggestion (sorry for not explaining it better) was that for BIPS to
>> > be a public domain (aka CC0) and a CC-BY option and nothing else.
>>
>> Indeed, we agree that BIPs should be licensed as permissive as
>> possible. Still, I wonder why you chose otherwise with BIP 134.
>> (Currently OPL and CC-BY-SA)
>
> OPL was the only allowed option apart from CC0.
I think you are misunderstanding what is allowed and what is required...
BIP1: "Each BIP must either be explicitly labelled as placed in the
public domain (see this BIP as an example) or licensed under the Open
Publication License"
So BIP1 *requires* PD or OPL but does not forbid other licenses. For
example, you are free to multi license OPL (and additionally: BSD,
MIT, CC0, ...)
BIP2: "Each new BIP must identify at least one acceptable license in
its preamble."
So BIP2 *requires* an acceptable license but does not forbid other
choices. For example, you are free to choose: BSD (and additionally:
PD, CC-BY-SA, WTFPL, BEER, ...)
>> BIP 2 does not forbid you to release your work under PD in
>> legislations where this is possible
>
> It does, actually.
Huh, I can't find it in the text I read. The text mentions "not
acceptable", but I don't read that as "forbidden".
>
>> One
>> of the goals of BIP 2 is to no longer allow PD as the only copyright
>> option.
>
> That's odd as PD was never the only copyright option.
Right. Though, up to now the majority of the BIP authors chose PD as
the only option.
Marco
|
