"Lex Spoon" lex@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
goran.hultgren@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.
This time I wasn't referring to the problem with Debian but to the discussions about SqueakL that has been done on OSI mailinglist for certification. It was said quite clearly (IIRC) that SqueakL is NOT OpenSource.
Just using small letters... Nah. That feels a tad like "pretending". I would write something else.
regards, Göran