> On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Mark Hammond wrote: > > > I just read a statement early in our book - "Python is an Open Source tool, > > ...". > > > > Is this "near enough"? Should I avoid this term in preference for > > something more generic (ie, even simply dropping the caps?) - but the > > OS(tm) idea seems doomed anyway... > > It's not certified Open Source, but my understanding is that ESR believes > the Python license would qualify if GvR applied for certification. I did, months ago, and haven't heard back yet. My current policy is to drop the initial caps and say "open source" -- most people don't know the difference anyway. > BTW, you won't be able to avoid flames about something or other, and given > that you're writing a Win32 book, you'll be flamed by both pseudo-ESRs and > pseudo-RMSs, all Anonymous Cowards. =) I don't have the time to read slashdot -- can anyone summarize what ESR and RMS were flaming about? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4