 |
 |
On 25/04/2013, at 22:48 , Nick White <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:21:46PM +1000, Scot Mcphee wrote: >> I don't actually understand your point. >> >> I open source my code as a matter of policy; I've always done that. > > My point is that "open source" is a term which is widely understood > and agreed to have a specific meaning, namely that anyone can use > the code according to the criteria in the Open Source Definition. OSI don't own the term "open source" and creative commons is commonly understood to be an open source licence. What ever the Debian people may say, or the OSI people. Because they are wrong. The condescension about "reading up" on open source I am going to ignore: I don't need to explain my software resume to you.