>
> These are good suggestions. They will be turned into reality with the
> greatest alacrity if you make them changes yourself and submit them to
> us.
Proposed "consumer-centric" index.html for www.opensource.org is
attached. Comments very much encouraged, on-list or in private.
Forrest
T
Forrest J. Cavalier III writes:
> opensource.org has always been laid out as a website for
> producers. (I think it sort of invites you to write your own
> license, based on the ordering and wording of links.) But
> isn't the purpose of a mark to inform consumers, not producers?
>
> Perhap
>
> This is the problem Russel Nelson and I are investigating in our
> discussion of section 2 of the OSD.
Right. I didn't see you discuss that the wording for appplying
the mark needs to be on the other web page, not just in OSD #2.
(And maybe if the change was there, you would not even have t
rk on any software that is distributed
under an OSI-approved license."
I think there is a consensus forming that the requirements for
self-certification must be amended to require OSD #2 explicitly.
Otherwise, someone can self-certify a binary-only distribution
under MIT, for example, k
4 matches
Mail list logo
