On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:10:42 -0800 (PST) Andy Tai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the history of Free Software and Open Source (that Open > Source is a marketing name (Bruce Perens) or marketing program > (Eric Raymond) for Free Software), can there be any question that > a software license the Free Software Foundation published is not > Open Source? Yes, tho for political reasons you're unlikely to ever see that response by OSI. It is relatively easy to argue, for instance, that the viral properties of the GPL are excessively restrictive and violate the spirit if not intent of the OSS definition -- but then that's an old, well thrashed, and very dead religious war. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. [EMAIL PROTECTED] He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
