Follow

"There is no trust in a world where anyone can invent their own definition for , and without trust there is no community, no collaboration, and no innovation." So true, way to many companies tries to trick you today by pretending, that Open Source just mean that you can see the source code. That's neither Open Source, nor , don't get fooled! opensource.org/node/966

@61 It is not about "degrees of openess" it is about that there is a well defined term Open Source for more then 20 years in the IT industry. Wordplay is typically only done to trick people and to use the good reputation of Open Source to sell something which is not Open Source.

@61 It is the nature of language that almost everything has at least two meanings. But there is always context which gives stuff a distinct meaning. You have this in all specials fields. You also wouldn't argue with a astrophysicist that all the stars he talks about are not astronomical object but your favorite actors and musicians. While on a naive level you would be right, it makes absolutely no sense to insist on it in the special context unless you want to trick people....

@61 ... and you wouldn't say to astrophysicists: "Don't insist on your stupid definition of stars, it doesn't make sense to define something in your special field, people will always come up with their own definition." Just because of some trolls or people who want to exploit it by purpose, right?

@bjoern @61 There is an industry-maintained standard definition of #OpenSource for 20+ years now. Anyone arguing otherwise is literally screaming into the void.

opensource.org/osd-annotated

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!