On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 01:39:52PM -0700, Eric Richardson wrote: > Which ones? This seems to be a slippery slope. All OSI should be > eligible otherwise perhaps the OSI definition is wrong. Isn't it good > enough to say that OSI, Free and 'list here' are fine? I don't clearly recall, but I think OSI approved at least one version of the APSL that Debian did not. > What about the bios and hardware etc. as they aren't free? Things are > gray, not black and white. The intent of a statement should be fine > unless some legal determination is made that restricts the community > that wants to follow the law. This doesn't really have anything to do with the differences between OSI and Debian. -- G. Branden Robinson | A celibate clergy is an especially Debian GNU/Linux | good idea, because it tends to branden@debian.org | suppress any hereditary propensity http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | toward fanaticism. -- Carl Sagan
Attachment:
pgp8dvlcrBCBH.pgp
Description: PGP signature