<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OSI and FSF Licence Approval Comparison</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/</link>
	<description>Updates seen at the co-operative for Software</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 21:25:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jldugger</title>
		<link>http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/comment-page-1/#comment-8113</link>
		<dc:creator>jldugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/#comment-8113</guid>
		<description>The OSI has refused to approve a license I proposed, assuming they would indeed refuse it.  The author of the game Soul-Fu felt his license was &quot;open source&quot; enough and that surely the OSI would rubber stamp it if submitted.  So I did exactly that, and they roundly dismissed it.  

Frankly, I&#039;d rather have help convincing people who are that far off the chart to change than reconciling minor differences amongst competing organizations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The OSI has refused to approve a license I proposed, assuming they would indeed refuse it.  The author of the game Soul-Fu felt his license was &#8220;open source&#8221; enough and that surely the OSI would rubber stamp it if submitted.  So I did exactly that, and they roundly dismissed it.  </p>
<p>Frankly, I&#8217;d rather have help convincing people who are that far off the chart to change than reconciling minor differences amongst competing organizations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/comment-page-1/#comment-8085</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:07:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.news.software.coop/osi-and-fsf-licence-approval-comparison/540/#comment-8085</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t quite think OSI serves much of a purpose beyond marketing (itself). When I did license evaluations, the FSF&#039;s resources seemed far more informative than OSI, too, because they actually include problems that make licenses non-free or disadvantages of free licenses and all that. Sure, you have to discount the bias towards their own licenses (particularly icky with GFDL), but that is straightforward to do, too, because they do their politics openly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t quite think OSI serves much of a purpose beyond marketing (itself). When I did license evaluations, the FSF&#8217;s resources seemed far more informative than OSI, too, because they actually include problems that make licenses non-free or disadvantages of free licenses and all that. Sure, you have to discount the bias towards their own licenses (particularly icky with GFDL), but that is straightforward to do, too, because they do their politics openly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
