> ...allows people to fork it, add their own changes... Emphatic agreement. Bryan Cantrill touched on this too: "...we [now] know that OpenSolaris didn’t go

> ...allows people to fork it, add their own changes... Emphatic agreement. Bryan Cantrill touched on this too: "...we [now] know that OpenSolaris didn’t go far enough: even though the right to fork was understood, there was not enough attention paid to the power to fork. As a result, the operating system never quite got to being 100% open" http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2010/08/03/opensolaris-and-the-power-to-fork/ http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2010/08/03/opensolaris-and-the-p... I experienced this first hand while being paid to work on FOSS. At the time, I just couldn't figure out why our very well resourced, well intentioned project was chowdering. Cantrill's illuminating insight, per usual, was spot on. -- To the pedants arguing with u/derefr: Stop it. Step back, get curious, ask u/derefr to clarify. u/derefr is trying to say something important. Some of us have actual experience with this stuff, not covered in the manual. It often takes great effort to reflect and articulate novel experiences. Especially when those experiences don't meet anyone's expectations. "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." -- Further, definitions, rules, bylaws, and code of conducts are just starting points. Ever DM a role playing game? Tried to get your local party to approve a resolution? Had your day in court? As if some formal definition somewhere is the last word on running a successful FOSS project. Please. Human projects are at least as complicated as the humans themselves.