I feel very strongly we should avoid the statement "OSI approval pending". As Goran said, some people do care about whether software is OSI compliant or not, and though I specifically don't, I would avoid software that is labeled in a misleading manner.

There were lots of good enough proposals mentioned.

BTW, I for one would be very happy if we could in good conscience remove the offensive paragraphs.

FSF/OSI incompatibility is a liability to this community, even if it's not one to us as individuals.

Daniel

Andreas.Raab@gmx.de wrote:

...

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".

• Andreas

...

Cees tried the SqueakL on the OpenSource guys (www.opensource.org) (they have a list for these things) and there are two problems:

1. The font clause must be removed. This is possible to do, but until it

has been removed SqueakL fails OSD compliance.

2. Clause 6 fails the non-discrimination test of OSD.

A quote from Matthew Weigel on that:

"IIRC, this actually came up with the APSL too (corrections, anyone? was it the Plan 9 license instead?). If that recollection is correct, then it seems that it might be 'easy' to point out that they have capitulated on that point previously (that's probably not the best wording to use around them, though :)."

And Forrest J. Cavalier III:

"Requiring compliance with U.S. laws, even in other jurisdictions is unnecessary. But the way paragraph 6 is worded, I think it obviously fails the OSD non-discrimination test.

I quote that paragraph:

6. Export Law Assurances. You may not use or otherwise export or

reexport the Apple Software except as authorized by United States law and the laws of the jurisdiction in which the Apple Software was obtained. In particular, but without limitation, the Apple Software may not be exported or reexported (i) into (or to a national or resident of) any U.S. embargoed country or (ii) to anyone on the U.S. Treasury Department's list of Specially Designated Nationals or the U.S. Department of Commerce's Table of Denial Orders. By using the Apple Software, you represent and warrant that you are not located in, under control of, or a national or resident of any such country or on any such list.<p>

I am sorry that there are some previous licenses to work with here. Squeak is pretty well-known. But my recommendation: DEFINITELY DO NOT APPROVE."

regards, Göran

---

Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation

-- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen!

---

Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation