[5th Draft] Open Letter to CNRI: Request for clarification

[phil]

On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:18:46 -0400, "Tim Peters"
<tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote:

>[Stuart Ford]
>> Any change in the license that changes our ability to release
>> products using Python will set all my hard work back to stage
>> one, plus make me look the fool for recomending the language
>> in the first place.
>
>[phil]
>> Exactly.  I even asked this question in this group and was
>> assured that this was not a problem.
>
>Well, "this group" hasn't even seen the new license yet, and even if they
>had they didn't write it.  Questions about the license's intent can only be
>answered by its author!  A slighly earlier version of the license was
>determined to be Open Source compliant by the board of the OSI, so if
>version 1.7 of OSI's Open Source Definition

I asked this question over a year ago. I don't really understand why
you're so agressive about it, unless you know something i don't?
(which, having read quite a number of your posts i'm positive you do).
There's a website and a newsgroup; i don't share a watercooler.

>
>     http://www.opensource.org/osd.html
>
>covers everything you want to do with Python, you can rely on OSI's judgment
>about that.
>
>so-i-guess-if-you-can-run-your-business-on-sympathy-and-heat-
>    you're-all-set<wink>-ly y'rs  - tim

I added Python as a cool feature for my customers (i thought it was
rather a nice capability and spent a _lot_ of my spare time
implementing it) . It's a total irrelevance as far as marketing is
concerned, and to be honest, i think i now agree with them (for
different reasons). The sad thing is that i have to explain to my boss
why i was such a wanker for recommending it to our customers, but i
can manage. Now that Stallman is  involved and the idiocy has begun,
i'm out of here and will solve the problem with VBScript (and it can
be solved that way, it was my other less interesting alternative).

I don't run my business on Python and it seems clear that anybody
would be a fool to do so.

Disappointing-ly-yrs

phil.

>
>
>