Governance organization: Difference between revisions

    (i can't see any sense in redlinking shared source + fix other linkage)
    (revert; an analysis specific to Consumerium of EACH of these consortia and what they do right/wrong needs to be here, ultimately, and Microsoft is a factor no matter WHAT you want to do, so... )
     
    Line 1: Line 1:
    A '''governance organization''' is a group that oversees some [[content]] or [[software]] to be sure its [[license]] is respected.  They also approve any modification to that license, in such a case that the license allows itself to be replaced at a later date.  The [[w:FSF|FSF]] and X/Open are such orgs.  The best practices of such organizations should be summarized here so that we can copy the best ones in the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]].
    A '''governance organization''' is a group that oversees some [[content]] or [[software]] to be sure its [[license]] is respected.  They also approve any modification to that license.  The [[FSF]] and [[X/Open]] are such orgs.  The best practices of such organizations should be summarized here so that we can copy the best ones in the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]].


    In shared source, the governance organization is the main vendor itself, e.g. [[w:Microsoft|Microsoft]].
    In [[shared source]], the governance organization is the main vendor itself, e.g. [[Microsoft]].


    In some [[open source]] variants, the organization is also responsible for some other things, e.g. the [[w:BSD|BSD]] license refers to the Regents of the University of California as its governance organization.
    In some [[open source]] variants, the organization is also responsible for some other things, e.g. the [[BSD]] license refers to the Regents of the University of California as its governance organization.