goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:

> Btw - perhaps we should change the wording "Squeak comes under an open
> source license" to perhaps "Squeak has a very liberal license" or
> something like that. I think the last word on OpenSource certification
> was that SqueakL is NOT OpenSource.
> 

It's not Debian compliant.  But Debian has stricter requirements than
merely being open source.  I don't know of any reason why Squeak
wouldn't be considered "open source", especially using lower case
letters.


Lex