Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 13:38:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>
To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: RE: [OT] What is OSS [was: Cocoon Stammtisch]
In-Reply-To: <84F0A43A4248CE45B5C0E20F4C40779C346AF2@naomi.webworks.nl>
Message-ID: <20030520133515.C83374-100000@foem>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT


On Tue, 20 May 2003, [iso-8859-1] Arj� Cahn wrote:

> - If the codebase is not freely available (according to the 10 OSI
> rules), then it's not open source (== not OSI Open Source). - What you
> pay for should be the *support on* the open source software. This
> includes documentation, tools, updates, etcetera. It's like taking an
> insurance. You can't pay for the Open Source Software itself (that
> wouldn't make sense), but you pay for the support and security that
> someone will keep it running for you.
>
> Of course, this is our opinion. Discussion would be appreciated.

With that definition one will have to find a new name for open source
*based* software, like for example IBM Websphere, Covalent Enterprize
Server or RedHats Stronghold. I.e. software which is baed on open source
software; sticks to most, if not all of the API's - but adds small bits of
proprietary/restricted code. Whill still preserving enough of the open
source spirit to prevent vendor lock in - and to give assurances to the
customers that if the vendor goes bust; the critical parts of his
infrastructure can be replaced by the original open source components

Dw