Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

On 1/17/10 12:37 PM, "Luis Villa" <luis tieguy org> wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, that policy has never been written down.
> That is because there is and always has been a very, very, very clear
> and common understanding that this is the policy. It takes almost
> willful ignorance of our history, culture and policy to suggest
> otherwise.

I don't believe that I actually _did_ suggest otherwise, Luis. If I somehow
created an impression that I believe that "non-free"/"non-open source"
software would be acceptable as a GNOME project, that was certainly not my
intention. Can you point out where I might have done so, if you feel that I

As the page that Shaun points out agrees--and thank you for that reference,
Shaun--a component must be "free/open source software" to be eligible.

If we're willing to use the term "open source" in our policy, why should
there any controversy about using it in a statement which describes what we
are? I'd certainly have referenced that page earlier, had I been aware of

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]