corinthia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL] White-Label Releases Only (was White-Box ...)
Date Sun, 21 Dec 2014 20:58:48 GMT
Jan Iverson points out that White-Box is confused with a particular form of software testing.
 I probably mis-remembered the term for generic labeling, and I am changing it here.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [] 
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 09:48
Subject: [PROPOSAL] White-Box Releases Only

I am not clear on to what degree Corinthia Source releases will allow building of binaries
that are end-user meaningful and working in anything more than console sessions.  This proposal
is intended to anticipate the prospect of the code being compilable to store "apps" and GUI-based
end-user applications on many form factors and platforms.  This proposal is particularly relevant
to cases where forks will compete for monetization, including via embedded advertising and
also sales through search-engine optimization and purchased ad placement.


Corinthia project source code releases and the source-code repository shall build to "white
label" binaries and distributions/deployments with default branding as unsupported Corinthia
development editions (stable or otherwise).  Provisions for branding of a distribution (and
distributions of forks) will be incorporated and given default settings.  This also extends
to producing digitally-signed versions designed to satisfy certification requirements for
introduction into software "app" stores.  There may be instructions for how to successfully
build a branded and supported authentic distribution, but one should not be directly obtainable
using the stable source without modification.

[There is no time-limit on this proposal.  Let's see the discussion first.]


If there are to be convenience binaries that are branded as authentic Apache Corinthia (incubating)
distributions, there must be an arrangement where the branded builds are accomplished in an
auditable way without releasing the branding materials to the public.  These builds cannot
be part of the Apache Release process, but there would have to be arrangements that demonstrate
the integrity of the resulting code. 

Note: This is not intended to prevent commercial derivatives of Corinthia source code, whether
closed source or with licensed open source code.  It's just about misidentification of authentic


It must not be easy to produce a fake product that trades on "Corinthia" and its Apache project
status as a way of obtaining sales and abdicating any support obligations by passing-off to
the Corinthia project.  Fakery can be innocent/careless, it can be willful (it has to be at
least that much in the case of this proposal), and it can be malicious.  All of these are
seen with impersonation of "Open Office" and it can be expected in the current mobile space
"Wild West" equivalent of patent-medicine nostrums.

An example of the situation is on this thread:

View raw message