On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 05:46:58PM -0700, Josh wrote:
> Is that all you have to say? A terminology issue?
> Open source is a method, not a religion.
This "terminology issue" actually betrays your complete lack of
understanding of Open Source and the idealogy behind it. This in itself
wouldn't be so bad if you hadn't chosen to describe your software as
Open Source, even though you had imposed restrictions which are anethema
to the Open Source movement. If I recall correctly, I brought this to
your attention when you first contacted me, but you failed to heed my
warning. Given this, some amount of public humiliation is inevitable,
you are fortunate that it happened before a reasonably small audience on
the development mailing list rather than in a much more public forum
like Slashdot.
> There is no reason why I can't do both to accomplish my goals. Go to
> www.mercuryfs.net/license.htm for the current version. If you read the
> license, you will probably find that it satisfies your requirements.
As you now know, it certainly does not satisfy my requirements, nor does
it satisfy the requirements of the Open Source Initiative.
> Remember, my goal is for a unified single standard. That will take a bit of
> management to achieve.
And it also requires significant arrogance on your part to suppose that
you will become that standard, particularly given the lack of peer
review that your architecture has endured, and the onerous license that
you propose to distribute it under.
> I would be a real shame to pass us by because of terminology.
Your lack of understanding of Open Source does not bode well for your
ability to create a robust architecture. Others have offered some
criticism of your actual design, personally I don't currently have time
to pick through your paper.
> PS: just because you have no respect for intellectual property doesn't mean
> you should attempt to force this method onto others. If you don't want to
> talk, that's fine.
Here on Freenet we are big fans of peer review. Part of peer review is
that you get dragged through the coals if you do or say something dumb
(it has happened to most everyone). If you want to learn from this
experience then you should listen to what people are saying, even if you
dislike the tone in which they say it, and either disagree with it
(explaining why - and be prepaired for a debate), or gracefully admit
your mistake and ask that people provide further peer-review on your
architecture.
Ian.
PGP signature
