Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: OpenBSD Is Now Forked As Bitrig

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,654

    Default OpenBSD Is Now Forked As Bitrig

    Phoronix: OpenBSD Is Now Forked As Bitrig

    There's a new fork out in the wild of OpenBSD. Bitrig, this latest OpenBSD fork, plans for some ambitious features...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTExODY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    openbsd's homepage really takes the cake on out of touch nerds. they make debian look like channel.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Be a very commercially friendly code base by using non-viral licenses where possible.
    Commercial/Free != Opensource/Proprietary.

    Try to become an incubator for students who wish to contribute via GSoC and internships.
    Not incubator. Brainwasher.

    These guys are so open, they will strip you out of your weapons to protect your freedom and will call this true freedom.

    "Non viral" zomg Any BSD is as viral as it gets, because it is incubator for proprietary blobs.

    I have idea. Why bother, just write "Code for our proprietary systems for free" and you are set. At least you won't lie

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    I have idea. Why bother, just write "Code for our proprietary systems for free" and you are set. At least you won't lie
    Most companies that develope open source software use permissive licences like Apache and BSD. It makes developing open source software easier and therefor more compelling. So yes, it kinda makes sense.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    Most companies that develope open source software use permissive licences like Apache and BSD. It makes developing open source software easier and therefor more compelling. So yes, it kinda makes sense.
    You can license under LGPL and dynlink your blob to the open code.
    You can license under GPL and call open code from your blob.
    You can dual/tripple/quad/etc license the project in GPL/../... This will assure the code is still protected from being closed up and unlawfully used by competition.
    You can just license in GPL and gain income from implementation, coding, adaptation, sponsoring.

    Or you can license in BSD - this would strip the right of its openness.
    Yes, companies use BSD, Apache etc. But not "most" and it does not change the fact I mentioned a sentence ago. Anyway, you are free to use whatever license you like, it is these BSD BullS lies that make me angry.

    As of GPL, it is highly compatible license, as long as you don't close up things, you are legit. It was designed as a license to protect freedom, not only to advertise it. We have BSD for that.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Anyway, you are free to use whatever license you like, it is these BSD BullS lies that make me angry..
    I fail to see what the "bullshit lies are. It's a fact that BSD style licences are easier for companies because it doesn't entitle them for anything. It's also true that BSD is more free licence than GPL because you can do what ever you like with it. GPL protects the freedom of the code with the cost of its freedom. Apache seems to be the de facto open source licence for just about corporate open source projects from web technologies to mobile nowadays. Recent high profile projects could be OpenStack, OpenOffice, Android and webOS for example.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,379

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    Most companies that develope open source software use permissive licences like Apache and BSD. It makes developing open source software easier and therefor more compelling. So yes, it kinda makes sense.
    Well, except for the one company most known for FOSS.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    Well, except for the one company most known for FOSS.
    Red Hat? They use permissive licence for their cloud stuff for example. I think the important part here is that if we want open source software to succeed we need to make it easy and compelling for the new companies. They don't necessarily have to start contributing right a way because it's more likely for them to do so at some point in the future if they already are using open source software.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Commercial/Free != Opensource/Proprietary.


    Not incubator. Brainwasher.

    These guys are so open, they will strip you out of your weapons to protect your freedom and will call this true freedom.

    "Non viral" zomg Any BSD is as viral as it gets, because it is incubator for proprietary blobs.

    I have idea. Why bother, just write "Code for our proprietary systems for free" and you are set. At least you won't lie
    Heh, they grab a body of other people's work (OpenBSD), slap a new name on it and try to grab some credit. If they were serious they'd *contribute to OpenBSD*.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoohoo View Post
    Heh, they grab a body of other people's work (OpenBSD), slap a new name on it and try to grab some credit. If they were serious they'd *contribute to OpenBSD*.
    There is small problem, OpenBSD is not very contributor friendly.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •