Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Jan 2013 01:41 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y "A senior OpenBSD developer has complained on a mailing list that upstream vendors of free and open source software are adding in changes without any thought of whether downstream users could adapt to the change. Marc Espie said this would hurt smaller players by not allowing them to keep up with the changes. Basically what is happening is that numerous changes are being made to Linux and smaller projects like OpenBSD cannot keep up with the changes. And, according to Espie, not all these changes are strictly necessary."
Thread beginning with comment 548209
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

BSD (and even AT&T UNIX) were open-source from the get-go. You couldn't get binaries for UNIX back in the day. You got tapes with the source on them, compiled them yourself, and installed it.

BSD was not "free software" according to the strange definitions of the GNU crowd. But it was (and always has been) open-source.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

BSD (and even AT&T UNIX) were open-source from the get-go. You couldn't get binaries for UNIX back in the day. You got tapes with the source on them, compiled them yourself, and installed it.

BSD was not "free software" according to the strange definitions of the GNU crowd. But it was (and always has been) open-source.

Sorry, I should have been more clear; BSD's source wasn't considered clear of all proprietary intellectual property when GNU started out.

Reply Parent Score: 3

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

OSI definition? Or look but don't touch?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

OSI definition? Or look but don't touch?

Somewhere between the two.

As I said above, there were a number of on-going legal disputes about the ownership of code.

Reply Parent Score: 3