[sldev] What's Open Source? the SL viewer is, for one.

[Dzonatas]

Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> Dzonatas: there are many ways of operating, releasing, and managing an 
> open source project and simply having a public repository and bug 
> tracker is neither required nor sufficient. Open source is all about 
> what you can do with the code, about the license and the availability 
> of the shipped source code, not about the release process or patch 
> acceptance policy. Open source was all about what you can do with the 
> code long before it was known as "open source", long before there was 
> a GPL or a BSDL or an MIT license.
>
> I've had patches accepted by projects that released software ONLY as 
> an unannounced dated tarball, and rejected by projects with open CVS 
> and bugzilla. They're all open source. So is the SL viewer.
>

LOL, I know we've had discussions like this about the past, but this 
time I know you aren't this old. =)

Open Source did start way before it ever got applied to software, yes. 
It wasn't just about what you could do with the code. The term started 
within intelligence agencies on processes to share information, hence 
'source'. They went further with the process to allow access to those 
sources with other agencies, hence 'open'. That was about the time when 
people were called computers.

-- 
Power to Change the Void