Definition of Open Source [was Re: pine: UW permission to distribute]

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 11:32 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> > Your opinion is irrelevant. 
> 
> And so is yours.  Only Fedora's counts here.  That's been my point all 
> along.  *Any* other arguement is also irrelavent.

Of course. But you don't separate the motives. Your choice to cut out
the remaining of the paragraph reveals it. You're reacting with emotion
instead of rationality.

You where talking about the definition of open source, and it was in
that regard that I made the comment.

As to Fedora, I would like to keep believing our opinions have at least
_some_ value, or what would the point of a community driven distribution
be?



-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20040720/ef6fb4b7/attachment-0002.bin