On 1/17/10 12:37 PM, "Luis Villa" <l...@tieguy.org> wrote: > > To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down. > That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear > and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost > willful ignorance of our history, culture and policy to suggest > otherwise.
I don't believe that I actually _did_ suggest otherwise, Luis. If I somehow created an impression that I believe that "non-free"/"non-open source" software would be acceptable as a GNOME project, that was certainly not my intention. Can you point out where I might have done so, if you feel that I did? As the page that Shaun points out agrees--and thank you for that reference, Shaun--a component must be "free/open source software" to be eligible. If we're willing to use the term "open source" in our policy, why should there any controversy about using it in a statement which describes what we are? I'd certainly have referenced that page earlier, had I been aware of it. _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
