Subject: Re: open source definition
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: 10 Feb 1998 21:00:17 -0000

bruce@va.debian.org writes:
 > I don't even know what the fsb list is. Should I be on it?

Free Software Business.  To subscribe (unsubscribe), send mail to
fsb-subscribe@crynwr.com (fsb-unsubscribe).

 > From: "Adam J. Richter" <adam@yggdrasil.com>
 > > The restriction that source code be distributed as official
 > > versions + diffs makes it difficult to replace the maintainer of
 > > a program unwillingly.  Such software eventually loses its development
 > > momentum.  For example, we would not have {Free,Open,Net}BSD today
 > > if 386BSD had had such a restriction.
 > 
 > Note that this is not a restriction. It says that a license can do this,
 > not that a license has to.
 > You can argue that one out with Eric, it's his favorite part.
 > I don't care about it much, nobody has had to use it under Debian to date.

It's necessary in order to call qmail "Open Source".

 > > Question for the "Open Source" folks: have  you consulted
 > > your legal counsel yet?
 > 
 > We did a trademark search. We can get the trademark.
 > Regarding defending it, we can not defend it as well as a meaningless
 > word like "Debian", that is clear. "Freed" rather than free offers little
 > improvement in this respect, it is the past tense of the same meaning.

But it loses the zero-cost meaning.  Slaves were freed, but you never
get freed samples in the mail.

-- 
-russ <nelson@crynwr.com>  http://web.crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok |   Freedom is the primary
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice |   cause of Peace, Love,
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |   Truth and Justice.