[sldev] [PROTOCOL] Protocol Documentation

[Argent Stonecutter]

OK, that conversation strikes at the very heart of the distinction  
between "Open Source" and "Open Systems".

If the source is the only documentation for the system, then there is  
no open documentation for the system, and it's not possible for it to  
be treated as an "Open System". It's an open source implementation of  
a proprietary system... in that the system is the property of whoever  
controls the source code to the "real" implementation.

If you know the protocol, you can implement something to talk to it  
or act like it or whatever, and you don't need anyone's source code  
to do it. If you can do that and get a system that keeps working  
through multiple generations of the system, because the people  
implementing it are sticking to the standard, then what you have is  
an open system.

If you don't know the protocol, and you have the source code, you can  
guess what the protocol is... but if there's no spec, and no  
commitment to backwards compatibility, you're in trouble. You're  
stuck with tracking someone else's source.

Both Open Source and Open Systems are valuable, but don't confuse one  
for the other. SL is a proprietary system, not an open one.