On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:33:13 +0530 (IST), Philip Tellis said:
Sometime Today, MS cobbled together some glyphs to say:
concrete examples of software that is OSS but not FS or that is FS
pine.
Are you sure pine is OSS? http://www.washington.edu/pine/overview/legal.html says: ,---- | Redistribution of this release is permitted as follows, or by mutual | agreement: | (a) In free-of-charge or at-cost distributions by non-profit concerns; | (b) In free-of-charge distributions by for-profit concerns; | (c) Inclusion in a CD-ROM collection of free-of-charge, shareware, or | non-proprietary software for which a fee may be charged for the | packaged distribution. `----
So, no can charge big bucks for pine. http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php: ,---- | 1. Free Redistribution | The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away | the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution | containing programs from several different sources. | 2. Source Code | The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in | source code as well as compiled form. | 3. Derived Works | The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must | allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of | the original software. `----
So, pine fails clause 1 of the OSS definition, and is thus not Open source software; since it prevents selling.
manoj