Re: [PROPOSAL] Open Source certification

On Fri, Apr 02, 1999 at 03:46:25PM -0500, Lynn Winebarger wrote:
> On 2 Apr 1999 bruce(at)perens(dot)com wrote:
> > From: Joseph Carter <knghtbrd(at)debian(dot)org>
> > > I formally propose that SPI step in and take control of its intellectual
> > > property.
> > I concur.
> Third for that.

Then count me as one against.

SPI currently does not have any formal membership policies, or any means
for anyone but its board to control it.

SPI does not have a history of fast and effective action -- we're still
waiting for publication of all the comments it requested about who should
control the open source mark, and we still haven't made any decision on
that. At present we can't even say "yes" to an open source project that
asks us for CVS space.

SPI does not have a history of effective advocacy of free software to
business or the masses.

In short, I don't think SPI is well placed to do OSI's job, let alone do
it better.

Further, OSI is making efforts in the right direction. They are discussing
how the APSL should be improved with Apple, and they've now published a
list of board members. Sure. They're still a way off being open enough
themselves, but this isn't the way to go about improving matters.

Cheers,
aj

--
Anthony Towns <aj(at)humbug(dot)org(dot)au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''