[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Re: Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]
- From: Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com>
- To: Development discussions related to Fedora Core <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: Re: Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]
- Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:10:23 -0400
Leonard den Ottolander (leonard den ottolander nl) said:
> > > How do the Red Hat developers perceive this issue? Is the "intersection
> > > between OSI and FSF" approach a good enough compromise for you?
> >
> > It's probably more-or-less mirrors the policy now.
>
> Good catch from Warren: Are you speaking of Core or Extras? Assuming the
> latter:
>
> Yes, but can we make that policy *explicit* please. That is the whole
> point of this thread. The fact that although many people assume we are
> using *something* *like* the FSF and/or OSI definitions of open source
> some obviously don't (open software versus free source). Now if we can
> get the precise definition used in writing the former could slap the
> latter with a reference to that definition.
I've got no problems with making stuff more explicit... first comes
making updating the web site easier. :)
Bill
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]