[sldev] Source reorganization needed

[Dale Glass]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 09:49:18AM -0700, Dzonatas wrote:
> That's LL's mode to keep the operation proprietary, call the bi-product 
> open source and reap the benefits of "gruntwork" done on the bi-product.
> 
> It would be cool if the virtue of Open Source is carried to the 
> operation itself, but that is not happening here. You need to either 
> work for LL or have signed their public contribution agreement in order 
> for them to call your work Open Source -- and that's not flying to well 
> with the Open Source community.
Huh? I'm not getting something here.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the viewer source
is under the GPL2, whether you sign the agreement or not. LL won't
accept patches without the agreement, but nothing stops you from
maintaining your own SL fork without having signed the agreement.


> If any reorganization needs to be done, it is to completely separate 
> what is intended to be Open Source software form that which is being 
> controlled by proprietary means. The OS community wants to distribute 
> the code as Open Source and wants to submit code as Open Source, but it 
> is a barrier and not Open Source if one as to sign proprietary agreements.
Viewer can be distributed as Open Source, with some exceptions, such as
Kakadu and SLVoice. But those aren't vital components of it.

Also, my changes are most certainly Open Source.

> I didn't want to make a tizzy about this, but since some employees at LL 
> have demonstrated that they do not wish to uphold the agreement I had 
> with LL -- I have to fall back to true Open Source terms pointed out to 
> only be within the limits of the Open Source Definition.
Explain this one?

 
> If a company thinks that the best in the Open Source community is a 
> bunch of gruntworkers, then I say someone in that company has been 
> smoking a pipe dream.
> 
> People in the OS community want to put forth excellent work. They know 
> there will be gruntwork needed, but that should not be the qualifier in 
> order to perform their art because that is like cleaning up after 
> someone else's mess, so that someone else can have fun and be more happy.
> 
> Don't shit on the Open Source community with leftovers because that just 
> is not "your world; your imagination." I feel stupid for buying into 
> this crap. Yep, you got me.. you fooled me, LL.
> 
> I invested all my time and money into this and what did I get back...   
> Robla saying "go get profession help."
I'm not sure what's all this about (you seem to have issues with LL I'm
not fully aware of), but there's no project I know of that guarantees
anything. There's no guarantee your patch will be accepted or even
looked at. 

For example, the Linux kernel is notoriously difficult to get a patch
merged into it. ReiserFS 4 has been trying for years and still haven't
managed, despite being professionals and dedicated exclusively to it.
The recent problems they had made that even more unlikely, but even when
everything was "normal", they couldn't get any guarantee of a merge,
just like everybody else.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070828/0e294957/attachment.pgp