For Approval: GPLv3

[Wilson, Andrew]

luis.villa at gmail.com wrote:

> More useful archive URLs inline, and then a summary of previous
> comments on OSD compliance below to re-start discussion about v3's OSD
> compliance (and only the OSD compliance :)

and see my post here
http://www.nabble.com/conducting-a-sane-and-efficient-GPLv3%2C-LGPLv3-Re
view-tf4197233.html
with the comments about lack of compatibility between GPL versions and
the
as-yet-unwritten OSD principle bounding license proliferation.

To my mind, this is one of the true ideological differentiators between
"open source"
and "free SW."  Open source is about growing the commons; free SW as
espoused
by FSF & RMS is about creating a maximally free class of SW, and
maximizing
utility of that free SW with the existing FLOSS base for the sake of
growing a commons is a non-goal for them.
This is an opportunity for OSI (IMO) to make the point that while
GPLv/LGPLv3
are OSD-compliant licenses, there is still a valid ideological
distinction
between free SW as defined by FSF and open source.

Andy Wilson