scientific license - fedora compatible?

[Jonathan Underwood]

On 23/05/06, Patrice Dumas <pertusus at free.fr> wrote:
> That's strange. It seems to me that this practice is explicitly taken into
> account in the point 4. at
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
>
>     Accordingly, an open-source license must guarantee that source be
>     readily available, but may require that it be distributed as pristine
>     base sources plus patches. In this way, "unofficial" changes can be
>     made available but readily distinguished from the base source.

Indeed. Seems the wikipedia entry is off beam.