[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] openbravo about open

From: Karl Berry
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] openbravo about open
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:38:15 -0600


Sylvain can probably answer more authoritatively about what has been
done on savannah in the past, but here are my thoughts FWIW.

It seems clear from this web page that openbravo is about open source,
not free software -- even discounting the name.

Open source software is [essentially always] free software (even if they
identify themselves as open source :), and so that is all to the good.
But when it comes to actually hosting packages with GNU resources, they
should support GNU philosophies, and that means being aware of the "free
software" vs. "open source" distinction and supporting "free software".

    I am confused about how are we to deal with projects with the word
    open in their name. 

My understanding is that we should not, in general, accept them for
hosting on savannah.

    Openbravo suggests using the Sun Java 1.5 runtime or later. 

That in itself is a problem.  They should recommend (and themselves test
and use) a free Java, such as OpenJDK or IcedTea, and not point people
to nonfree software.

    I believe that 1.5 is a non-free dependency, but I am sure
    that those wish to use free software will find the OpenJDK jre. 

Projects we host should not leave it up to users to magically find their
way to free resources.  They should recommend and point the users to
them directly.
    Hey, I said a free alternative that has the word open in it. OpenJDK
    jre is in GNewSense so why not?
    Why is it that we argue against using the word open, if the dependency
    name  has the word open?

Just because something has "open" in its name doesn't mean we cannot use
the package in GNU.  

    There are other projects on Savannah that contain the word Open in
    them, granted some of those are derived from another project that has
    the word open in its name but there are others that do not. Were those

In general, I expect so.  Or perhaps they were exceptions for some
reason or another.  I don't see a reason to make an exception here.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]