http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/03/03/fauxpen-source Because these are the early days of a long revolution . . . Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:35:22 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/03/03/fauxpen-source#comment-94311 Poo-tee-weet - blog Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/03/03/fauxpen-source/#comment-94311 <!--%kramer-pre%-->proven that their business no longer depends on being a "good citizen" and thereby automatically cease being an "open source company" by my definition. When I mentioned this definition in an email exchange with colleagues (John provides his POV in a blog post of his own), Dave said that "good" and "bad" are to "nebulous" terms for him. I am also aware of the danger of equating open source with terms like this, given the history that even spawned the necessity for the creation of the term <!--%kramer-post%--> proven that their business no longer depends on being a “good citizen” and thereby automatically cease being an “open source company” by my definition. When I mentioned this definition in an email exchange with colleagues (John provides his POV in a blog post of his own), Dave said that “good” and “bad” are to “nebulous” terms for him. I am also aware of the danger of equating open source with terms like this, given the history that even spawned the necessity for the creation of the term

]]> http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/03/03/fauxpen-source#comment-94310 Planet MySQL Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.openparenthesis.org/2007/03/03/fauxpen-source/#comment-94310 <!--%kramer-pre%-->proven that their business no longer depends on being a "good citizen" and thereby automatically cease being an "open source company" by my definition. When I mentioned this definition in an email exchange with colleagues (John provides his POV in a blog post of his own), Dave said that "good" and "bad" are to "nebulous" terms for him. I am also aware of the danger of equating open source with terms like this, given the history that even spawned the necessity for the creation of the term <!--%kramer-post%--> proven that their business no longer depends on being a “good citizen” and thereby automatically cease being an “open source company” by my definition. When I mentioned this definition in an email exchange with colleagues (John provides his POV in a blog post of his own), Dave said that “good” and “bad” are to “nebulous” terms for him. I am also aware of the danger of equating open source with terms like this, given the history that even spawned the necessity for the creation of the term

]]>