Would you please remove Jahia from the list?

I don't intend anything mean spirited by this. Jahia is nice and their licensing is well, interesting, but Jahia is not open source. To be clear and fair about what we mean by "open source" let's stick with licenses approved by OSI (http://www.opensource.org) or those which meet the same criteria.

Often companies wish to piggy back the success of open source for profit or at least free marketing without really being open source - and sometime this just happens out of ignorance and confusion.

Collaborative development is not even a requirement for "open source". That's just often beneficial and sometimes inevitable. And getting the source code when you obtain|purchase a product is only part of the criteria (and it doesn't have to be free to be open source, although in practice it might as well be). You must also have the freedom to do what you want with the code. These other licenses fall under what might be termed "shared source". And let's remember after Linux gained ground Microsoft began offering shared source licenses to select customers.

I am not trying to debate open source versus shared source, just create clear communication. Others may be in the same position as me, where they are required to use open source, so it's important to not mislead.

I wish Jahia was open source so I could use it. It's good product. Who knows, maybe they'll be like Apple who wanted Darwin to be open source enough to modify their license to meet OSI criteria. I doubt it, they don't seem to have or want the business model for it. Jahia will probably be more like Caucho (Resin) and start clearly communicating that they are not open source.

thanks