Francis Hunt scripsit: > I completely agree and that is the point. The intention of the OSI > certification mark is surely to convince people that the product it is > associated with is "Open Source". Hence why does the use of the OSI > certification mark not require source code distribution as well as an OSI > approved licence?
Ah, now I understand. OSI members, this is trivial but important. The page http://opensource.org/docs/certification_mark.php actually says that if something is licensed under an OSI-certified license, it can use the mark. It doesn't say that the software itself has to conform to the OSD, only its license. In particular, it doesn't force the author to make source code available! Pkease fix ASAP. -- And through this revolting graveyard of the universe the muffled, maddening beating of drums, and thin, monotonous whine of blasphemous flutes from inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond Time; the detestable pounding and piping whereunto dance slowly, awkwardly, and absurdly the gigantic tenebrous ultimate gods -- the blind, voiceless, mindless gargoyles whose soul is Nyarlathotep. (Lovecraft) John Cowan|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|ccil.org/~cowan -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
