[openbeos] Re: [Glasselevator-talk] Re: Glasselevator-talk digest, Vol 1 #3 - 3 msgs (themes and other apps)...

  • From: "Ithamar R. Adema" <ithamar@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 20:25:47 +0100

>I have to disagre with you David. And Ithamar's missing the point too.

And I think you were missing my point Daniel :)

>Deej, is right. We cannot control alternate or "rogue" version from 
>appearing. Anyone, absolutely anyone can checkout our entire source 
>tree at any time. They can then proceed to make changes from minor to 
>major, recompile, then redistribute it as an another OS. Our license 
>does not prohibit this.

That's right, and that's cool. A few people might misuse that, but if 
e.g. the guys from FinalScratch decide they want to make a distro 
specificly for a machine running FinalScratch, all the best to them :)

>All we can do is promote an "official" version and a set of standards 
>for it. If we do it right, no one would want an alternate version. Of 
>course, this is all hypothetical talk at the moment, because we are a 
>long way away from having a source tree for a complete OS. But when we 
>do -- be prepared -- rip-offs will appear as sure as the sun rises.

Don't agree here. We can promote our baseline, and let distributors 
make their own adaptions and hopefully give some of that back for 
consideration in the baseline. We get to decide what goes into the 
baseline, and they get to decide what goes into the distro. It's a 
linux-like world out there.....

Only the public for the distro's is pretty much more limited, so I 
guess there will be room for just 1 or 2 main distro's and the rest 
will automagicly whither away. If they don't, they must have a right 
for existance :)

If you don't like the way this works, you took the wrong road and 
should have made OBOS closed-source.....

Regards,

Ithamar.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 01-2002