On 09/09/2012 07:03 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Mike Linksvayer
<ml(a)gondwanaland.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Richard Fontana <fontana(a)sharpeleven.org>
wrote:
>> I removed the reference to the Open Source Definition in the
>> Proprietary-Relicensing section, because (to the extent I ever did) I
>> no longer consider the Open Source Definition to be a useful
>> definition of open source (a point I explained in my talk at LinuxCon).
>
Not being trollish here: if I understood your critiques of the OSD,
don't most of them also apply to the FSD (e.g., ignore community
structure, development mechanisms, etc.)? Further discussion may be OT
for this list, but I would love to hear your thoughts on this at some
point.
The FSD has problems too, don't get me wrong. I do like the document
the FSF maintains here:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
as distinct from the FSD proper.
(Not that I agree with everything in this document, but I like the
structure of an elegant definition followed by periodically revised
interpretive commentary.)
As noted in my earlier message I may write something up about this
soon, though I've been kind of busy.
- Richard