Content deleted Content added
No edit summary Tags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit Disambiguation links added |
Contents6762 (talk | contribs) m Undid revision 1264732893 by César R323 (talk) Revert useless graffiti. |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 26:
}}</ref>
===
As [[Netscape]] released the open-source [[Mozilla]] browser in 1998, [[Bruce Perens]] again drafted a set of open-source guidelines to go with the release.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Overly |first1=Michael R. |title=The Open Source Handbook |date=2003 |publisher=Pike & Fischer |isbn=978-0-937275-12-2 |page=5 |language=en}}</ref> It has been claimed that the Open Source Definition was created by re-titling the exact text of the DFSG.
A modified version of this definition was adopted by the [[Open Source Initiative]] (OSI) as the Open Source Definition.<ref name="b733"/><ref>{{cite book | last=Katz | first=Andrew | title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice |chapter=Everything Open | publisher=Oxford University Press | year=2022 | isbn=978-0-19-260687-7 | chapter-url=https://academic.oup.com/book/44727/chapter/378969640 |page=521 }}</ref> The OSI uses the label "open source", rather than "free software", because it felt that the latter term had undesirable ideological and political freight, and it wanted to focus on the pragmatic and business-friendly arguments for [[open-source software]].<ref name="b733"/> It adopted a closed rather than membership-driven organizational model in order to draft the definition and work together with a wider variety of stakeholders than other free or open-source projects.<ref name="b733"/>
Once the DFSG became the Open Source Definition, [[Richard Stallman]] saw the need to differentiate [[free software]] from [[Open-source software|open source]] and promoted the Free Software Definition.<ref>{{cite web|author=Richard Stallman|author-link=Richard Stallman|url=https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html|title=Why "Open Source" misses the point of Free Software|work=GNU website}}</ref>
===Debian diverges===
Line 46:
This prompted another General Resolution, 2004–004,<ref>[http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004 General Resolution: Sarge Release Schedule in view of GR 2004-003]</ref> in which the developers voted overwhelmingly against immediate action, and decided to postpone those changes until the next release (whose development started a year later, in June 2005).
==
[[Source-available software|Providing access to the source code]] is not enough for software to be considered "open-source".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Greenleaf |first1=Graham |last2=Lindsay |first2=David |title=Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains |date=2018 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-107-13406-5 |page=485 |language=en}}</ref> The Open Source Definition requires that ten criteria be met:<ref name="v459">{{cite book | last=Erlich | first=Zippy | title=Handbook of Research on Open Source Software | chapter=Open Source Software | publisher=IGI Global | year=2007 | pages=187–188|isbn=978-1591409991}}</ref><ref name="b733">{{cite book | last1=Gardler | first1=Ross | last2=Walli | first2=Stephen R | title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice | chapter=Evolving Perspective on Community and Governance | publisher=Oxford University PressOxford | date=2022 | isbn=978-0-19-886234-5 | doi=10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0002 | page=47–48, 52}}</ref>
#Free redistribution<ref name="v459"/>
| |||