Re: A Gentle Introduction to the Squeak Community
Tim Rowledge <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.foundation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] is claimed by the authorities to have written: > > [email protected] 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 -- Tim Rowledge, [email protected], http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim Useful random insult:- An early example of the Peter Principle.