[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: pine: UW permission to distribute

On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 10:15 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Jos Vos wrote:

> And that's why I've been harping on what definition of opensource Fedora 
> uses.  No one has yet to (officially) clarify that.

I think it should do it in one of these, by order of preference (first
is best):

 1. Free Software http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

 2. Debian FSGL   http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

 3. Open Source   http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php

Why I prefer Free Software can be best summarized here:



+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]