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

[Aaron Bennett]

On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 16:29, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> ..even trivial matters like the
> agreed on definition of open source.
> 
> This is especially important when the small consensous making group is
> discussion/making policy that a larger group is going to be trying to
> interpret and abide by, as is the case of the larger community
> developer pool who will be using fedora extras to maintain packages
> in.  If leadership has to continually re-clarify the consensous
> decision to new community members who disagree with veteran community
> members, thats a waste of leaderships valuable time and prevents
> community from establishing its own mentoring processes of new
> volunteers.


I believe, as it stands, the way which important policy decisions are
passed down to the fedora community is...

The first person who's email address matches /^.+ at redhat.com/ to respond
to a thread becomes the authoritative source of Red Hat's official
opinion, unless they explicitly state "This does not represent official
redhat opinion."  In that case, control passes to the next redhat.com
email address to reply...

:-)