On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:24 PM Tobie Langel <to...@unlockopen.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I wasn't clear enough, sorry. I believe the OSI should seek to be > broadly representative of the overall open source community and the broader > population which is affected by open source. > Honest question, but how are you defining "overall open source community" in a way that it includes people that don't already agree with the core values that define open source? It might be that the people who don't yet agree with these core values are part of a different community that should be looking for a different name to label themselves. It is that community that should be researching whether authors discriminating against other individuals or groups is helpful or harmful toward their intended goals. It is clearly possible to be using OSI approved licenses for your project, or using OSI licensed software, and yet not be part of the open source community. It is one of our core values that we don't discriminate that way, and do not require that you agree with the principles that brings us together in order for you to participate in the production and use of OSI licensed software.
_______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
