Re: [rt-pmc] Dual Licensing RT Projects

[Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>]

sounds reasonable to me...nice improvement that better reflects reality :)
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx


On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Mike Milinkovich
<mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear RT PMC,
>
>
>
> In yesterday’s Eclipse Foundation Board of Directors meeting, a new policy
> was agreed to which has significant positive implications for the RT
> top-level project.
>
>
>
> As I am sure you’ve noticed, many projects within EclipseRT are
> dual-licensed. And most, if not all, of the recent projects required a Board
> vote to approve their acceptance as a dual-licensed project.
>
>
>
> Yesterday, it was agreed to allow top-level project charters to specify
> dual-licensing combinations which were desirable for a project community.
> The TLP charter would have to be approved unanimously by the Board, but once
> it has any new project could be accepted without a Board vote. Accordingly,
> I would like to suggest that the RT PMC revise its project charter to allow
> projects licensed under:
>
>
>
> 1.       EPL 1.0
>
> 2.       EPL 1.0 + EDL 1.0
>
> 3.       EPL 1.0 + ALv2
>
>
>
> This has the clear advantage that any new project interested in coming to
> Eclipse would have a clear understanding of which licensing options were
> open to them, without requiring Board approval.
>
>
>
> I hope this sounds like goodness to the group?
>
>
>
> Mike Milinkovich
>
> Executive Director
>
> Eclipse Foundation
>
> mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> +1.613.220.3223 mobile
>
> +1.613.224.9461 x228 office
>
> @mmilinkov
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>