On 12/03/2012 10:50 PM, David Morris wrote: > > > On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > > >> I support this idea, but I think that free software should also be considered >> as part of this experiment (free software and open source are not synonymous). >> Using the acronym FOSS and defining it as Free or Open Source Software in the >> document would achieve this. > > By my understanding free is not applicable in that software can be free > without the source being available. The key in my mind to the open source > sugestion is the ability of others to examine the actual code for coverage > of edge concerns or whatever. Open source is available today under many > license agreements. Free is not a requirement to achieve the review > objective. Folks, can we *please* not rat-hole on this? If the proposal gets to an IETF LC, then I'll make sure to try find some wording that works for folks who've expressed divergent opinions on the topic before the start of IETF LC. So if you care about this, I'd ask that you wait for an IETF LC before diving in, since a) it doesn't matter until then and b) I promise, I'll try get some wording that works for all before then. Thanks, Stephen.