🚀 go-pugleaf

MW Ron <mwron@metrowerks.com> wrote: 
| PowerPlantX  is, was, and always will be OPEN SOURCE, it is just not
| public domain or GPL 
 
Miro Jurisic wrote: 
| So you don't mind if I publish all of PPX on my web page? 
| Or have you not read  the Open Source Definition at 
| <http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php>? 
 
Do recall: OpenSource.org does *not* have the authority--or power--to
define unilaterally what the phrase "open source" means. Their "Open
Source Definition" states what *they* mean when they use it, not
necessarily what *other people* mean.
 
As the very same web page also says: 
| The OSI Certified mark is OSI's way of certifying that the license 
| under which the software is distributed conforms to the OSD; the 
| generic term "Open Source" cannot provide that assurance 
 
In other words, even OpenSource.org, the very source of the Open
Source Definition you cite, doesn't claim that something called "open
source" necessarily adheres to the Open Source Definition. Like it or
not, the phrase is a generic, not a trademark; any discussion of "open
source" has to recognize that. Unless someone says "open source as
defined by OpenSource.org", you have no assurance that the
OpenSource.org definition is the one intended.
 
Glen Fisher