AboutWelcome to Free Software Daily (FSD). FSD is a hub for news and articles by and for the free and open source community. FSD is a community driven site where members of the community submit and vote for the stories that they think are important and interesting to them. Click the "About" link to read more...
Recent discussions around the so-called “Open Core” model for open source have led to an entirely fresh thought: that we are about to enter a new and perhaps golden age in open source business. But which licence will ensure that golden age?
IT organizations that feel safe from open source licensing violations might be wise to check their code, as open source components are rapidly seeping into applications by way of offshore and in-house developers taking open source shortcuts, as well as a growing population of open source-savvy grads entering the workforce.
Stephen O’Grady and Simon Phipps have both recently published interesting posts on the current state of open source, with Stephen pondering the relative growth of open source and Simon wondering whether the “commercial open source” bubble has burst.
Open-source solutions used to be adopted quietly by company boffins who snuck in an Apache Web server or an open-source development tool suite under the philosophy "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission" (not to mention "It's easier to do it with open-source tools than to get an IT budget").
Setting the legal nuances of the chosen open source license aside, wouldn't two products under any open source license have the same claim to the open source moniker?
This is a review of a relatively new resource, called Open Source in the Enterprise (OSIE) by Bernard Golden. The report's raison d'être is to help companies to decide if open source applications are right for their enterprise, and if so, how to implement it intelligently.
At the Utah Open Source Conference yesterday I presented a dilemma. Briefly, the idea is that as open-source buyers grow comfortable with open source they will stop spending money on open source. This leads to tragedy of the commons-type problems and a difficulty in encouraging the creation of more open source.
While "open source" refers to software's underlying license and its adherence to the Open Source Definition, there are numerous examples of open-source projects that offer an open license but a relatively closed development process. But is it open enough? It's been called "fauxpen source" and worse, but we may have to get used to it.