Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

hp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 201 posts

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#81

Post by freehunter »

scotu wrote: post #76
freehunter wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did mention they wanted to control the development of the system to avoid fragmentation, so the license may be more restrictive than Android. Full open-source but cannot sell devices with wildly custom builds without HP's approval seems to be okay with me. As long as they leave a clause for being able to legally share your custom homebrew ROMs, they can put as many restrictions on hardware manufacturers as they…

I think there's no way to adhere to open source definition and restrict that. And it is a good thing

There certainly is. The source code is free and open, but the license to distribute your changes for money is not. There are many licenses like this, especially when copyrights are involved.

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#82

Post by freehunter »

jlarocco wrote: post #75

Do they link to the project or the code anywhere? All I could find was http://opensource.palm.com/packages.html and it's just the GPLed code they were legally required to release anyway. Anybody know if there's a project page or anything?

They're still working on the license for the code, so it might take a few weeks to get it all out.

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#83

Post by freehunter »

laughingfather wrote: post #73
hkmurakami wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former HP intern and someone who laments the company's demise, I too have something to smile about today.

As father of 2 idiots, i will laugh for a week.

Novelty accounts on Hacker News?

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#84

Post by masklinn »

turingbook wrote: post #21

Why not merging with Tizen to be a dominant platform？

How do you merge two completely and utterly unrelated projects exactly? And why would they merge WebOS into a project which does not exist and is the latest in a long line of abject failures to yield any result?

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#85

Post by [deleted] »

scotu wrote: post #76
freehunter wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did mention they wanted to control the development of the system to avoid fragmentation, so the license may be more restrictive than Android. Full open-source but cannot sell devices with wildly custom builds without HP's approval seems to be okay with me. As long as they leave a clause for being able to legally share your custom homebrew ROMs, they can put as many restrictions on hardware manufacturers as they…

I think there's no way to adhere to open source definition and restrict that. And it is a good thing

[deleted]

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#86

Post by mikecane »

mikecane wrote: post #52
jnbiche wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the upside of Google doing the same to Android was?

Google gets Google Search on devices. And HP will get ... oops. A piece is missing here.

I figured out the piece: the webOS App Catalog. Keep it going. Future profit justifies webOS continued development.

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#87

Post by hugoroy »

freehunter wrote: post #81
scotu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's no way to adhere to open source definition and restrict that. And it is a good thing

There certainly is. The source code is free and open, but the license to distribute your changes for money is not. There are many licenses like this, especially when copyrights are involved.

Well, obviously you haven't understood what free software is http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Re: HP to Contribute webOS to Open Source

#88

Post by w33ble »

siglesias wrote: post #46
gms wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PR. They haven't got a clue about what do with webOS, so instead of announcing its shutdown, they 'donate' it to open source.

And this is worth the tens of millions, if not hundreds, that they would have received for selling it?

Selling it to who, exactly?
Post reply on HN