On Feb 29, 2008, at 3:32 PM, R. Scott Belford wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Feb 29, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Clifton Royston wrote:
Sure, it's a new verse to the tune of that old song "Embrace and
extend."
I always thought the song was titled, "Embrace, extend and
extinguish", but perhaps thats just how the chorus goes.
The funniest thing was watching CNBC last week and hearing the most
candid comment from someone completely uninitiated to FOSS. The
reporter who had been in the press briefing and had a follow up
interview commented, "If I had a dollar every time he said open or
community."
true dat.
Note that they're not saying "Free Software". MSFT intents to usurp
"Open Source" by assimilation.
It doesn't help when members of OSI's board decide that licenses that
grant freedom to USERS are unimportant, because its about the (wait
for it...) community.
Quoting Russell Nelson @ <http://www.opensource.org/node/243>:
I'm starting to think that the dynamics of Open Source production
are such that user licenses are crap. Yes, I'm saying that
everything that we've put into licenses, all the thought, all the
drama, all the durm-und-strang, is wasted. You might wonder why.
Why, indeed. Consider that all Open Source licenses are a unilateral
grant of privilege. That doesn't reflect the reality of the
situation. Yes, somebody can take a code drop, but the advantage of
Open Source doesn't exist without community. The value is not in the
static code, the value is in the relationships between people. Free
Software has never been about freedom (pace RMS). It's been about
the community formed around software that is open for community
contributions and use.
So, it turns out that the part of licensing to which we have paid
short shrift, contributor licensing, is the most important. It
doesn't really matter what rights the users of the software gets. It
matters, instead, what the contributor grants to the project. The
relationship between the user and the project is a matter of
necessity. If a user gives up that relationship, they lose, so
there's no need to control that relationship.
Anybody else with me on this? Or am I talkin smack?
See also: <http://www.opensource.org/node/209>, <http://www.opensource.org/node/194
>
IMO, OSI (or at least Nelson) is Microsoft's puppet.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.hosef.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luau
