Subject: Re: Choardic Commons
From: Steve Mallett <>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:16:17 -0300

Tim O'Reilly wrote:
> On 6/25/02 3:39 PM, "Brian Behlendorf" <> wrote:
>>I find it curious when people don't think that collaboration is
>>*essential* to getting one's job done.  Open source tends to get pitched
>>as an all-or-nothing proposition; this makes it tough to see it in the
>>context of collaboration that happens today in almost every field.  Many
>>companies, even competitors, work together on projects of
>>non-differentiating value, and then compete elsewhere.
> I'm with Brian.  I sometimes feel that the whole licensing issue is a
> massive smokescreen that keeps people from seeing what open source is really
> about.  It's a suite of techniques for facilitating distributed
> collaboration.  Open source licenses are a means, not an end.  And there are
> other means that are equally important:
> * Ubiquitous networking, so contributions can easily be shared. (Open source
> had much less reach in the days when you had to ship a 9-track tape.)
> * Techniques for updating distributed code repositories, starting with Larry
> Wall's patch, and moving up through CVS and version control systems.
> * Mailing lists for discussion.
> * Processes for capturing, deciding on, and acting on user input.
> And many of these techniques apply to far more than software. 

What I find so interesting about this is that people simply tend to 
gravitate toward points of contention.  Hence, license posturing.

There is nothing to argue about in the transaction of 'scratch my back & 
I'll scratch yours' so we find something to argue about and in many 
cases create problems to argue about.

Silly humans.
Steve Mallett | | Stable, Open Source Apps | <personal>

I'll be attending the O'Reilly Open Source Convention 
(, starring as my dumbass self.