I didn't realize this would be such a sensitive issue. I am glad that I bounced the idea to the geowanking list before I published anything in a more public forum.
First let me say that I believe some members of this forum have voiced an appropriate concern that I didn't think of, and further more, a concern that I need to be conscious of. I do think my intentions were misunderstood somewhat. I think my use of the word "lousy" might have had something to do with that. I have no problem with people making money from FOSS software. That might even be something I might want to do one day. :] Let me tell you what prompted by original post on this topic, and then maybe we can get some more thoughts on it. The thing that first got me thinking of this topic was a link to an article sent by a friend from work. This friend doesn't know very much about open source, but he knows that I dabble in it. Here is the link to the article: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&; articleId=9011340 I had never before considered that a company might release source code under an open source license as a way to harm a competitor. That got me to thinking, what motivates companies to release code under an open source license? After a company does so, what makes it an ethical member of the open source community? Is source code like drug money? Can it be tainted if depending on the source? What is the difference between a company that releases its source code under an open source license, but makes no or little work to integrate contributions from the community? What about a company that manages an open source product, but makes critical decisions about the code base without informing or involving the non-corporate and volunteer developers? I'm not saying that what these companies are doing is wrong, but I think it is obvious that some companies are better open source partners than others. The other thing that triggered this post was my IT Guys decision to pick-up a commercially supported Linux version. I'd been using Debian for a while, but he wanted something that had a company standing behind it. We decided to go with Xandros. I asked myself, "What type of open source citizen is Xandros? How actively do they participate in Debian development? Are they just sucking blood from Debian to make a profit, or are they applying bandages and helping to heal wounds? How does the Debian project feel about Xandros? How do I find out if there a company that I want to put my dollars behind. What if I was an investor and not just an IT Guy looking to buy a single seat of an operating system? How does an investor learn which companies play nice with open source, and which ones are just catching a ride on the latest "buzz-word" technology? Let me tell you what I think the most important reason is to answer the question I have raised. What if I'm a business considering how to release open source software and I want to "do-it-right"? Where would I look to guidelines on how to be a good member of the community, and where would I look for things to avoid? Where is my guide on being a good open source citizen? It may be true that the open source community isn't mature enough to ask questions like this. However, it sounds like a really interesting question for someone pursuing an economics major... The Sunburned Surveyor -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Gillies Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 11:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Measuring Open Source Citenzenship Frank Warmerdam wrote: > Rich Gibson wrote: >> Hi Landon, >> >> With respect, I think that is a bad idea. Framing this is a matter of >> judging various types of citizenship creates an additional obstacle >> for companies to dodge when attempting to go FOSS. >> >> > I think it is very possible for a company to release code under an >> open source license, but at the same time to be lousy >members of the >> open source community. >> >> You initially used the word citizenship, and here moved to 'members of >> the open source community,' and decided that some members of the >> community are 'lousy.' This framing bothers me. Code is good. >> Releasing code is good. Anything beyond that is gravy... > > Rich, > > I completely agree with you, and find this whole line of review makes > me queasy. It's like trying to judge which companies are "christian > enough", or turning it around which might be communist sympathizers. > > I think we can laud some companies for taking progressive steps with > regard to open source, and we can occasionally highlight companies who > have gone out of their way to throw up anti open source FUD (ie. SCO, > Microsoft at times). But beyond that the whole idea smells bad to me. > > Without going into specifics, I've seen examples of organizations being > judged as "not open source enough" by puritans and seen the damage it > can cause. It seems like something that splits the community up rather > than putting up a big tent and letting different folks and organizations > come in as far as they are comfortable with. > > Landon - don't forget how powerful your blog can be! :-) > > Best regards, Frank, I agree with you (!) mostly, but I have to ask for specific examples of these organizations that were damaged by the puritans. Did they have to lay people off because some Stallman wanna-be criticized them on a blog? Did any IPOs fall flat? Is there a dollar figure for the damage caused by open source jihadists? Cheers, Sean -- Sean Gillies http://zcologia.com/news _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
