Andreas.Raab@gmx.de is claimed by the authorities to have written:
Andreas.Raab@gmx.de wrote:
<quote> technically, Squeak isn't Open Source </quote>
Yes, Andreas - that is true.
Guys, please. Even if it may be technically correct that Squeak is not OSI approved and therefore not Open Source (tm) Software that's no way to phrase it. Just imagine what you would think if you read this. If that's the way you're going to do marketing then good night. For starters change this into "not OSI approved" instead of "not Open Source" and if someone complains then make it "open source" (IIRC, then only "Open Source" is tm-ed). In fact, I would say "OSI approval pending".
I agree. How about something like:- Squeak is an open source system, although it is not currently 'Open Source(tm)' as defined by OSI.
If it ever seems wise to attempt to persuade Apple to release it from the supposedly problematic clause(s) and they do so, then we can change the web page.
tim