Rick Moen writes:
its mission to ensure that OSI Certified licences really convey the
To be clear, that would be OSI Approved licenses. It turns out --
and Bruce can hardly be blamed for not having a clue, because we
didn't either -- that Certification has some pretty struct
requirements under
Removing the CC's again. Alexander, you have twice been barred from
license-discuss because of your repetitve arguments which do not
address points already made by other people. I am no longer on the OSI
board nor the OSI postmaster, but I will be happy to explain the
situation to the current OSI
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
[...]
and I can tell you that anyone with even a little skill to perform
research can find out that Mr. Moen is at best deeply mistaken.
In what way? Please be specific about which bits of research refute
which of Mr.
Alexander Terekhov writes:
May I suggest that you finally do your own research, Mr. Nelson?
You're the one who wants to convince me of something.
--
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY
Quoting Russ Nelson (nel...@crynwr.com):
[to the Terekhov person:]
If you think Mr. Moen has failed to address some portion of
Dr. Bernstein's argument, then you should say that.
More to the point, he can lay every bit of it out on a Web page
somewhere. I can even recommend software he could
Quoting Russ Nelson (nel...@crynwr.com):
Now, in this particular case, Mr. Moen has pointed to a web page of
his which addresses Dr. Bernstein's arguments.
FYI, for convenience, that bit has a specific HREF tag:
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Licensing_and_Law/public-domain.html#djb
I'd actually
6 matches
Mail list logo
