Changeset - 03bcbb839d9c
[Not reviewed]
0 2 1
Bradley Kuhn (bkuhn) - 9 years ago 2013-11-15 18:02:39
Began CommunityHealth UseCase, focusing first on license choice.
3 files changed with 23 insertions and 0 deletions:
0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)
Show inline comments
@@ -64,3 +64,7 @@ data does, so I think it's tough to do it as a list of questions.

FIXME: This is assessment of what the API for storing the accounting data
does, so I think it's tough to do it as a list of questions.

### Evaluation of the [[Community Health|USeCases/CommunityHealth]]
- Is the [[license both determined as Free Software by FSF and OSI-approved|USeCases/CommunityHealth#license-approved]]?
- Is the [[license GPL-compatible||USeCases/CommunityHealth#gpl-compatible]]?
Show inline comments
@@ -36,3 +36,4 @@ criteria in evaluating ExistingProjects, then please make sure to update the

- [[Reading and Reporting API|UseCases/ReadingAPI]]
- [[Storage API|UseCases/StorageAPI]]
- [[Health Assessment of the Development Community|UseCases/CommunityHealth]]
Show inline comments
new file 100644
# Health of the Development Community

## Good License Choice

<a id="license-approved"></a>
Obviously, code that's not under a license that is both
[OSI approved]( and is not
[approved by FSF as a Free Software license](
is completely useless to us.

<a id="gpl-compatible"></a>
It would also be quite preferable if the code were under a
[a license that FSF has determined is GPL-compatible](,
so that code from GPL'd projects can be easily shared and GPL'd applications
can be built on top of anything we build.  Code not under a GPL-compatible
license would face a high burden (i.e., the code would really have to be
absolutely wonderful in all other respects) to dictate such a license choice.

0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)