> Who says, that the power to define the term "open source" is up to OSI > and not to U&W or you or me? Of course, pine is "open source", because > everybody can have a look into it. That a big part of "other type of > open source" developpers consider the license of pine not sufficient > doesn't change this.
The SUSE Linux OSS version is stated to only contain Open Source Software, if this definition is to differ from the widely accepted principles defined by the OSI or FSF then it would at least require a clear statement as to what OSS does mean in the context of SUSE. If you accept the pine licence as open source then windows is nearly open source, after all the kernel source code is available to partners and some academic institutions etc, but those with the source code would not be able to redistribute modified versions. > distribution. The last decisions with regard to proprietary drivers and > now the movement of pine to CD6 seem to show, that SUSE is not the most > user-friendly distribution anymore, but the "OSI definition", "GPL > rulez", "kernel policy forever" shouting developpers baby. Many might not wish to sacrifice the freedoms afforded by the GPL for greater ease of use, after all many consider windows to be easy to use but it is not Free software. As I understood it this was the reason for the OSS version, for those who did not want any proprietary software. As for the kernel module issue this is slightly different as the kernel is GPLed and binary kernel modules become part of the same program by the FSF's definition and hence must be GPLed or violate the developer's copyright. > So the question is, is the 6th non-OSS-CD defined from a OSI-compliant > perspective, then move pine there. Indeed, either a special definition of OSS for SUSE which is lenient enough to include pine and also devalue the OSS naming is written, or pine is moved out of the OSS section and into the CD6/extra repository. Another possibility is that the pine/pico licence could be changed, but this seems highly improbable given that Debian had this discussion years ago Benji --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
