Richard Fontana <font...@sharpeleven.org> writes: >> 1) Have licenses out in the world that are OSD-compliant, and that >> we informally agree are "open source", but that we don't certify. >> This will cause growing divergence between "what is open source" >> and "what the OSI has approved". That would be very, very bad. > >I consider it important to understand, and acknowledge, that this >divergence already exists in most people's minds (i.e. those people who >have enough knowledge of what's going on in the real world). >It exists in my own mind.
Certainly, and in mind too. But I'd always assumed that the divergence exists mostly for the minority of people paying close attention. I could be wrong, and if I am, then perhaps (1) isn't so bad after all, since we seem to be playing a valuable role even in that world. It would still be useful to have a better answer on US-gov't-produced PD software, though. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
