Steven Haigh wrote:
On 07/04/2008, at 10:10 PM, Simon Jolle wrote:2008/4/7, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@xxxxxxxxxxx>:Joseph L. Casale wrote:What is the closest open source mail server I can replace exchange with that provides the nearest equivalent in user experience?What about Zimbra or Scallix?Both not Open Source Scalix uses Scalix Public License (SPL) and Zimbra uses Yahoo Public License (YPL) - both crap licenses and not OSI approved. cheers SimonOpen Source does not depend on the license. You've been drinking the GPL koolaid too long if you think this is the case.Without turning this into a religious debate that I can see on the horizon, you should really read this:http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.phpComparing the Zimbra licensing (http://www.zimbra.com/license/) to the definitions in the link above, Zimbra seems to fit the definition of Open Source...
It does NOT fit the definition ... mainly because of the Attribution requirements ... if it DID fit the defination, it would be approved by the OSI. It was rejected as an OSI license. Here is one discussion:
http://linuxgazette.net/148/moen.htmlReally though, whether or not it fits with YOUR definition of "Open Source" or Simon's or mine is not relevant ... the only FACT is that the OSI has not approved either license (and both asked for approval). What that means to each user is not really relevant to this list. The OSI only matters to people who think it matters, and to others it does not.
The Scalix license (http://www.scalix.com/community/opensource/licensing.php) may also fit the bill...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
