packaging `open-source'

[S11001001]

I quote from a Mandrake spec for DotGNU Portable .NET:

Name:           pnet
Version:        0.3.8
Release:        1mdk
Summary:        A portable interpreter for .NET plateform binaries
Group:          Development/Other
License:        GPL
Source: 
http://www.southern-storm.com.au/download/%name-%version.tar.bz2URL: 
        http://www.southern-storm.com.au
Buildrequires:  treecc >= 0.1.0
Buildroot:      %_tmppath/%name-%version-buildroot

%description
The primary goal of this project is to build a stable and portable
interpreter for .NET platform binaries, together with a suite of open
source tools to build .NET applications. The initial target platform
is Linux, with other platforms to follow in the future.

Now, since pnet is a GNU project, *and* Southern Storm says `free 
software' not `open source', would it be appropriate to tell the spec 
writers to change that annoying `bug'?

--
Stephen Compall
DotGNU `Contributor' -- http://www.dotgnu.org

It read like a socialist polemic, but I saw something different. I
saw a business plan in disguise.
        -- Michael Tiemann, co-founder of Cygnus Support, on the
        GNU Manifesto