Re: How about creating addons.gnome.org
- From: Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>
- To: Johannes Schmid <jhs jsschmid de>
- Cc: foundation-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: How about creating addons.gnome.org
- Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:54:48 +0200
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 10:41 +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote:
> > Sure, however, why not open-source software?
> As far as I see it, there is a clear definition for free software while
> "Open Source" can refer to many things and while all free software is open
> source not all open source software is free software.
> The minimal definition of open source is that you can look at the source
> code, that is not enough if you may not share/change/distribute/etc. it.
> All other definitions of open source are rather weak. There is the OSI
> definition but there are also others.
> Point 4 of the OSI definition would be rather annoying for GNOME in
> pratical terms.
GNOME could allow all open source software that is compatible with LGPL,
for example. I guess that's reasonable given that most lib* projects of
GNOME are LGPL. Now that copyright reassignment must be preapproved on a
case-by-case, GNOME could add "no copyright assignment requirement" to
the list of "when in doubt" too. Etcetera.
> IMHO this is leading to nothing and it is far easier to stick to open
> source. In the terms above there is a clear text saying that you should
> contact the release-team when in doubt. If you have a non-free but open
> source license then I am pretty sure there is some doubt.
I agree with sticking to open source with a text saying that you should
contact the release-team when in doubt, and that this is far easier.
Philip Van Hoof
freelance software developer
Codeminded BVBA - http://codeminded.be
] [Thread Prev