Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: A quick & dirty draft

Author:Richard Katz
Posted:8/23/2000; 6:35:09 PM
Topic:Next survey: Are you an open source developer?
Msg #:20036 (In response to 19977)
Prev/Next:20035 / 20037

Open Source Definition. =======================

Here's mine (It's pretty short):

If the programmer or company provides its source code to you and lets you read it, then it is Open Source - regardless of what license or restrictions they put on source code use (and regardless of whether OpenSource.Org recognizes their particular licensing agreement as "valid").

If the company does not provide the source code, then it's not open source.

I think that's relatively simple and straight forward avoids a lot of baggage and silliness. To see my take on the recent Sun and IBM discussions, see:

http://www.javaskyline.com/news.html

Open Source Politics ====================

Personally, for myself, when I post source code, I grant unrestricted use of source code - or something simple like requiring the copyright notice be carried with the code. But I think agreements can have all kinds of flavors to suit different purposes.

I like the idea that when you post source code, you are creating a public resource. But I don't object to some other company having their own restrictions. That's up to them.

And sure, you can ask someone to give something away. But it's still theirs to give. Giving is a question of the heart.

Rich Katz

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:12 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.