On Nov 14, 2009, at 11:24 PM, Partha Chakrabarti wrote:
Dear BBusers,
I initially did not want to post this in the BB. With all due respect,
could we use the word "open source" for those programs where the
latest build or source code are available to the community?
Regards, Partha
Open source, in it's most common definition (as decreed by the Open
Source Initiative), must meet 10 requirements that I cut-and-paste
below from wikipedia to make my post seem more meaty and thoughtful.
It would help if you could point to specific examples where the term
has been misused. I haven't seen it misused in any recent discussions
myself, but I don't claim to have the greatest reading comprehension
in the world.
James
=====
Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code.
The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the
following criteria:
1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away
the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution
containing programs from several different sources. The license shall
not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in
source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is
not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized
means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable
reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without
charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a
programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source
code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a
preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow
them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the
original software.
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in
modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch
files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program
at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of
software built from modified source code. The license may require
derived works to carry a different name or version number from the
original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of
persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in
a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the
program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic
research.
7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the
program is redistributed without the need for execution of an
additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's
being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is
extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the
terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is
redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in
conjunction with the original software distribution.
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is
distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license
must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium
must be open-source software.
10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual
technology or style of interface.
– Open Source Initiative, http://opensource.org/docs/osd
