Subject: Re: Section 2 source distribution terms (was Re: GPL vs APSL (was: YAPL is bad))
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:18:12 -0400 (EDT)

Karsten M. Self writes:
 >   - Ensure that sources are distributable.

Not only distributable, but also available.

Sigh.  Last time I sat down to rewrite #2, I ended up concluding that
we really need to have *two* OSD's: one describing source code, and
another describing the distribution of a special type of derived work
created through mechanical means from source code which is also not
only licensed under an Open Source license, but which is also actually 
available.

Phwew!  Started this posting with only three periods left in the type
tray, and I managed to complete it using just those three!

-- 
-russ nelson <sig@russnelson.com>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | It's a crime, not an act
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | of war.  For my take, see:
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | http://quaker.org/crime.html
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3