Comments on: Forkability http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/2005/12/29/forkability/ what was Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:05:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: links for 2006-01-02 at protocol7 http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/2005/12/29/forkability/#comment-2262 links for 2006-01-02 at protocol7 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:19:13 +0000 http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/?p=78#comment-2262 [...] Forkability A discussion on defining a standard or software open if someone can fork it (tags: standards) [...] [...] Forkability A discussion on defining a standard or software open if someone can fork it (tags: standards) [...]

]]> By: Dan Sickles http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/2005/12/29/forkability/#comment-2250 Dan Sickles Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:30:48 +0000 http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/?p=78#comment-2250 As fto forkability, I like Richard Stallman's response to Sun's open source claims: http://linux.sys-con.com/read/47210.htm?CFID=547041&CFTOKEN=C2CE5A81-DED5-E061-5625137C0F1A35A6 As fto forkability, I like Richard Stallman’s response to Sun’s open source claims:

http://linux.sys-con.com/read/47210.htm?CFID=547041&CFTOKEN=C2CE5A81-DED5-E061-5625137C0F1A35A6

]]> By: John Cowan http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/2005/12/29/forkability/#comment-2245 John Cowan Fri, 30 Dec 2005 06:59:33 +0000 http://www.megginson.com/blogs/quoderat/?p=78#comment-2245 I agree that forkability is a good quick test for the openness of software; if your code cannot be forked, you are not an Ephraimite. But I think standards are different: the quick test for an open standard is "Can anyone implement it against the will of the maintainer?" If so, it's open. Just being able to change the text of the standard is not enough. I agree that forkability is a good quick test for the openness of software; if your code cannot be forked, you are not an Ephraimite. But I think standards are different: the quick test for an open standard is “Can anyone implement it against the will of the maintainer?” If so, it’s open. Just being able to change the text of the standard is not enough.

]]>