Subject: Re: improving project maintainership
From: Nick Jennings <>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:06:57 -0800

On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:07:04PM -0500, Federico Lucifredi wrote:
> >     They are instead, members of the open source community.
> >
> > There is no separate open source community; we are all part of one
> > community, even though we disagree and support different movements.
> > Our community is the free software community because it was
> > deliberately built by the efforts of the free software movement.

> There is therefore a broader Open Source community that has within itself a
> smaller subset, the Free Software movement. Belonging to the OS set implies
> availability of the source code in some form, belonging into the FS set
> implies greater Freedom on what to do of such code as specified in the GPL.
> There might be other, disjoint subsets of the OS set that grant other,
> "different" rights (such as linking to proprietary libraries) and do not
> necessarily intersect hte FS set.
> Besides, I find it quite hard to see how the Open Source community might be
> called the 'Free Software community' when, as you claimed a few messages
> ago, they are not interested in what the FS people are trying to achieve. It
> is quite the case as if the Republicans demanded this country to be called
> the "Republican community", all of its people "republicans", while granting
> that there is a 50% of "Democrats" ot there that are part of the community
> while not necessarily sharing in its values.

 Believe it or not, at one time Democrats and Republicans were actually
 one party, the Republican-Democrat Party. Over time the split and now
 are the representative extremes in capitalist politics: Do you really
 want to see the FSF and OSI become at odds with each other in the
 same way? But thats not my point...

> Perhaps what has most often been done with sets should be continued. So
> there are Americans, there are "Open Source people", and among them are
> those who are also (or especially), "Free Software People", notwithstanding
> the /fact/ that they are Open Source people as well because they support
> code openness.
> It should be quite clear which set is a subset of the other based on how
> restrictive membership conditions in the two are. Or would you prefer be
> called a Republican ? ;-)

 Although a community can be created from one simple shared interest, that
 same community can also contain vastly different opinions and beliefs 
 while still maintaining it's integrity as a community. 

 Take for instance, your neighborhood. In many areas this "community" is
 not as strong as it may have once been, but it still exists, if not
 simply because of the fact that you all live in the same general area
 and therefore issues surrounding that area concern you all. That is
 a community, even if some people are good Mormon and some are Pagan 
 mudslingers, Republican or Democrat.

 Whatever you want to call this community, doesn't matter. It is a 
 very clear and distinct community. We all share many interests,
 more than I do with my neighbors, and therefore I consider this
 community one of my favorite communities and one I very much enjoy
 participating in. Anywhere from releasing code (GPL is my license
 of choice) to participating in mailing list discussion, to reading
 my favorite community-related news sites.

 We are one community with different backgrounds and goals. The
 simple fact that we are all sharing this list to voice our 
 opinions on is reflective of our undeniable connection. 

  Nick Jennings