ANN: Twisted 0.16.0: Licenses and Open Source don't conflict.

[Jeff Shannon]

In article <1vKt8.21374$Kq4.896208 at news2.calgary.shaw.ca>, 
bbollenbach at shaw.ca says...
> > This doesn't change the fact, though, that Public Domain 
> > software is Free Software in the FSF  sense of the word.  
> > 
> > (See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/categories.html)
> 
> Interesting that in the page you cite, they state specifically the
> opposite of what you're saying:

Uh, no they don't.

> 
> <begin gnu>
> Public domain software is [...] a
> special case of non-copylefted free software, [...]

Which *does*, in fact, mean that it is free software.  Unless 
perhaps free software means something other than free software?


> However, I was still correct in saying that just because you release in 
> the public domain doesn't mean you're releasing "free" or even more 
> generally "open source" software, which was mainly the point I was
> trying to convey.

It is indeed open source, in the sense that everyone has a right 
to access and use the source code.  It does *NOT* guarantee the 
right of access to derivative works (which the GPL does), but 
that doesn't mean that it's not open source.

(Where, specifically, are you getting whatever definition of 
"open source" that you're using?  You seem to be *far* more 
restrictive in your use of "open source" and "free software" than 
even the FSF is...)

-- 

Jeff Shannon
Technician/Programmer
Credit International