[sldev] Upcoming viewer releases?

[Lawson English]

Dzonatas wrote:
> Dale Glass wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:44:24AM -0700, Dzonatas wrote:
>>   
>>> There absolutely no need for LL to have you sign a contribution in order 
>>> for LL to produce a Open Source version of the viewer. There is only a 
>>> need to sign the contribution if LL wishes to use your contribution 
>>> under conditions they can re-license the code completely. At this point, 
>>> there is no effort by LL to produce a version of the viewer with 
>>> contributions that are meant only for the Open Source viewer.
>>>     
>> Right, but why should they? I could take some code I released, slap the
>> GPL2 on it, and not accept any patches. Or I could accept patches on the
>> condition you fly here and stand on your head. None of that would make
>> the original release less Open Source.
>>   
>
> It would be Open Source if we all had access to the process to produce 
> those releases. The process, instead, is kept internal, which is not 
> open to outsiders, until there is a source drop and the label slapped 
> on it called Open Source.
>
> That is not how Open Source works. That is how free software works.
>
> Netscape's motive to produce the openness of Mozilla is a good 
> example. Netscape moved its production from being internal to being 
> open. The difference here is that Netscape now produces browsers based 
> off of Mozilla. Netscape's browser are still internal, but the entire 
> basis of it is open by the design of Mozilla.
>
> For LL, it is backwards, they want to produce something as internal 
> first and then release that as Open Source. Just because the source 
> code is free doesn't mean it is Open Source. There needs to be the 
> whole process of open design and collaboration in order to produce 
> releases.
>
> As you see in Netscape, it does not control what does and does not get 
> into the Mozilla development. Nobody need to sign an agreement with 
> Netscape in order to produce code for Mozilla.
>
>
>> I have one, Nicholaz Beresford has another. 
> Hmm, that kinda avoided the point.
>
> What do you think Open Source means?
>

I gotta think that this is more appropriate for a different forum. 
OThers have suggested we create a spearate sldev list for this kind of 
chat, and I agree, but don't know the procedure to ask for it. Maybe a jira?

In fact, please vote for:

https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/WEB-306