3 ms·

I promise this is a genuine question. Can someone explain the background here that explains why discussions about open-source to turn explosive? Like, the poin

I promise this is a genuine question. Can someone explain the background here that explains why discussions about open-source to turn explosive? Like, the point here is that if this venture means to support open-source then it should open-source its own stuff (which means what here? Its website, I guess)? I mean, I guess that makes sense to me? But why so much passion about this? LOL, I really don't get it. I really think I'm missing some basic background. In my mind I'm thinking "hmm, that's a good point. Kind of inconsistent..." but I never make the leap to "you clearly are NOT interested in supporting open-source". Can someone explain it to me? I promise if any of this sounds flippant, it's unintentional. I really think there's some OSS history I'm unaware of that makes me not understand these exchanges.

mch82 7y ago
I doubt there is a single correct answer to your question. That said, two things come to mind... First, commercial software used to be very anti open source. See [1]. As a result, there can be distrust & skepticism when commercial companies get involved in open source. Second, there are a range of “open source” licenses reflecting a broad spectrum of values and beliefs about how much code should be shared and with what restrictions/obligations. So, people enter into the discussion from a variety of view points. Some people only use GPL or AGPL software and won’t participate in online forums unless the forum software is released under those licenses. People in that group might feel excluded from OpenTeams in the same way someone who is a strict vegan might feel excluded at a vegetarian restaurant. [1]: “Balmer: ‘Linux is a Cancer’” (2001), https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_cancer/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_...

mch82 7y ago

I doubt there is a single correct answer to your question. That said, two things come to mind... First, commercial software used to be very anti open source. See [1]. As a result, there can be distrust & skepticism when commercial companies get involved in open source. Second, there are a range of “open source” licenses reflecting a broad spectrum of values and beliefs about how much code should be shared and with what restrictions/obligations. So, people enter into the discussion from a variety of view points. Some people only use GPL or AGPL software and won’t participate in online forums unless the forum software is released under those licenses. People in that group might feel excluded from OpenTeams in the same way someone who is a strict vegan might feel excluded at a vegetarian restaurant. [1]: “Balmer: ‘Linux is a Cancer’” (2001), https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_cancer/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_...