On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Eric Boutilier writes:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages. But I guess you're
right, there is no reason to exclude packages because they are not
on the list. How about defining the universe as packages with an
OSI approved open source license?
...
+1 on OSI-approved being a better boundary than the (rather arbitrary)
GNU/UNESCO list.
We dealt with this issue (ad nauseum) during the ARC review.
I may have gotten off track of the projects intentions. I was thinking the
project's components would _generally_ fall within the boundaries set by
the ARC case, but not necessarily.
In any event, it's not a big sticking point. I just looked over the
FSF/UNESCO submission process/policy, and it appears that just about any
F/OSS software can be added by just doing some paperwork.
Eric
If you want a different definition, then you'll need to come up with a
concise proposal for it, and run a new ARC case that supersedes
2007/047. You should probably work with Stephen Hahn on it, as he was
the submitter for the case in question.
A big -1 from me for that direction. I think it's far too ill-defined
to work, as it walks right into problems with forked projects.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
