The critical piece of information missing is what license they plan to
release it under. Will it be GPL? Some other GPL-compatible license?
Some GPL-incompatible license? Public domain? They don't say.
But they are asking for public comment. As important as it may be to
get them to use the right terminology (Free Software instead of Open
Source), I think it's far more important to try to get them to specify
that the code will be licensed under some version of the GPL. I'm sure
the FSF would prefer we advocate for GPLv3, but could we live with GPLv2
if that was the best we could get?
Mark Rosenthal
On 3/25/16 3:33 PM, Greg Rundlett (freephile) wrote:
The US Fed. Govt. is proposing a pilot program to release at least 20% of
newly developed custom code as 'OSS'. https://sourcecode.cio.gov/ They're
accepting comments now. And since it's hosted on GitHub, you "comment" via
the issue queue, and you can also fork the project and issue a pull request.
I forked it and created a pull request.
https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/pulls proposing to use the
term 'Free Software' in place of 'Open Source'
If the government actually goes through with 'open sourcing' their work,
it's actually a giant corporate handout because companies will have greater
access to publicly funded works that they can then incorporate into
proprietary works.
What do you think?
Greg Rundlett
https://eQuality-Tech.com
https://freephile.org
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
