Robert Levin writes: > Coming into the discussion late, I will comment that, to the extent that OSI > performs its functions without consulting the community, it can't expect to > be considered representative of the community.
I consider us to be following Jon Postel's model. Jon never seemed to consult the community, but boy he sure listened. > There were clear, obvious problems with the Apple license, for example. Everybody has 20-20 vision in hindsight. I would point out that Bruce was not removed from the board mailing list in a timely manner, and received a copy of the APSL at the same time we did. If the problems were so obvious, why didn't Bruce spot them in time? > I think a lot of us would just like to see OSI research more than certify. > I.e., if someone comes to you to wanting to know if their new license is > open source, resist the temptation to believe that it will be open source if > you rule ex cathedra it's so. Get input from the broader community, and > express your opinions as opinions. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
