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

Re: Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]

Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 10:39 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:

Leonard den Ottolander wrote:

However, the permission granted by UW to you does not suffice to satisfy
the (what I believe to be the) general definition of open source
software, which means the right to redistribute with any modification.

That's your opinion. My opinion is that opensource implies only that you have access to the source and rights to with it (mostly) as you like, which doesn't necessarily imply any sort of binary redistribution right.

Your opinion is irrelevant.

And so is yours. Only Fedora's counts here. That's been my point all along. *Any* other arguement is also irrelavent.

Actually, the kind of opinions like yours are one of the reasons I prefer
to speak about Free Software (Software Livre in Portuguese):

See above.

-- Rex

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