The OSI just expanded its board with two new members.
Groklaw wants the OSI to bash Microsoft and keep it out of the community. Fine. But it's directly inimical to why the OSI was set up in the first place.
Open source runs the risk of being so insular in its ideology that it becomes irrelevant. The OSI can help by expanding its membership.
The Open Source Initiative judges open source, but isn't democratically elected. Does this matter?
The role of the OSI may well be to do nothing, what with all the emphasis on doing "something," and much of it bad for open source.
Bruce Perens wants to be on the OSI board. What has he done to deserve this?
OSI seems to think it has a license proliferation problem again. It doesn't, and never has.
Microsoft has finally engaged with open source in the correct way and was rewarded accordingly.
Michael Tiemann, president of the OSI, has decided to stop coddling fake open source companies and push for a new era of enforcement. Here's why he's right.
One of open source's biggest failings has been to extend its relevance into the Software as a Service world. The OSI has finally corrected this with the approval of the Affero GPL.