Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License
From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:23:54 -0700

Quoting Matthew Flaschen (matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu):

> I think this would be a very useful step.  If OSI approves these
> licenses, it will be recognizing that part of Microsoft's shared source
> licensing program is open source.

That would be, as it turns out, because those two licences _are_ open
source, and constitutes what we call "recognition of obvious truth" and
"conducting a certification mark programme with integrity".

> Microsoft could reciprocate by clearly distinguishing this part from
> the rest.

It would indeed be good for Microsoft Corporation to make some effort to
distinguish licences that are open source from ones that aren't.  Maybe
a Venn diagram on the Shared Source Web page.  ;->  (Not intended as a
serious suggestion.  Some readers may need to consult a professional
humourist.)

-- 
Cheers,                English is essentially a language in which "up" has 
Rick Moen              forty-seven dictionary definitions, but 
rick@linuxmafia.com    antidisestablishmentarianism is considered a "hard word."
                       -- John M. Ford, http://ccil.org/~cowan/essential.html