On 16 Jan 2001, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Manfred Schmid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > To me, a lot of the discussion gets down to the "free beer" question.
> > May I ask the Board for an official statement: Is the charging of
> > license fees (or execution fees) definitely a no-go to qualify it as
> > OSI-compliant Open Source?
>
> You may ask this question, although I already know what the answer
> will be.
I'm no longer on the OSI board, but my opinion is, there's no way in
tarnation I can reconcile a mandatory fee for execution (no matter what
name you give it) and OSD conformance.
Brian
- Re: IPL as a burden kmself
- Re: IPL as a burden Ben Tilly
- Re: IPL as a burden Manfred Schmid
- Re: IPL as a burden Gregor Hoffleit
- RE: IPL as a burden Carter Bullard
- Re: IPL as a burden Angelo Schneider
- Re: IPL as a burden Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: IPL as a burden Manfred Schmid
- Re: IPL as a burden Seth David Schoen
- Re: IPL as a burden Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: IPL as a burden Brian Behlendorf
- Re: IPL as a burden Ben Tilly
- Re: IPL as a burden Manfred Schmid
- Re: IPL as a burden Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: IPL as a burden Mark Koek
- Re: IPL as a burden Ralf Schwoebel
- Re: IPL as a burden SamBC
- Re: IPL as a burden Frank LaMonica
- Re: IPL as a burden Gregor Hoffleit
- Re: IPL as a burden kmself
- Re: IPL as a burden Forrest J. Cavalier III

