Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe Apple.
http://www.opensource.apple.com/
The question was whether they'll make the whole OS open source, not just some bits of it. (Microsoft produces some open source, too.)
Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
21–29 of 29 posts
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#22actually not "all" projects .. where's the DRM thingy source code?
that's something I'd like to see
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.opensource.apple.com/
Yeah. I'm aware that Apple has made some great contributions in Open Source. However, that doesn't change the fact that they live on proprietary technologies and investing in OSS is just a strategic business action. This article here explains this: http://sealedabstract.com/rants/beyond-open-source/
great article, thanks for sharing!
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they'll release old sources for historical / nostalgic reasons - the same reasons for id Software to open source Doom and other classic games.
They did with MS-DOS. I don't understand why not most old software (OSes, programs, games) aren't commonly made open source though, it's not as if anyone is making money with Windows 95 these days.
I gave the same argument, and was met with things like "because unfettered access to old OS source code might reveal new vulnerabilities in our later OS source code." To which I responded "good, then you can fix them and have better source code"
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they'll release old sources for historical / nostalgic reasons - the same reasons for id Software to open source Doom and other classic games.
They did with MS-DOS. I don't understand why not most old software (OSes, programs, games) aren't commonly made open source though, it's not as if anyone is making money with Windows 95 these days.
Most cited reason I've seen is the patents/copyright mess. Just look at how System Shock 2 is handled for example. Patches being anonymously contributed by a group/person that is said to have access to the source.
There's also the situation with the lost source code. For example, as I've understood it, the only reason the Dark Engine source code became available were due to someone finding it in an old Dreamcast SDK.
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#26Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#27I hope in a decade or so, someone will come to Microsoft forums and informs that the source code of windows doesn't seem to be visible on their github account and asks if they could fix this.
That's a great point, though also one that bears investigation. One of the FUD points that Microsoft long made against Free Software was that "anyone could see the code".
Turns out that there's a lot of access to Microsoft's codebase as well, it just happens differently.
There's sharing with various vendors, including device driver and applications development companies, to greater or lesser extents.
More significantly, there was a program under which universities (notably in Canada as I recall) had access to much or all of the NT / XP code base under a restricted license. The possible scope of exposure was huge.
And of course, there are unintentional disclosures -- I've heard of, and been at, companies whose source code was leaked, often in its totality, sometimes multiple times.
The difference being that those who receive such code cannot comment openly on it or provide fixes to bugs as is the case in Free Software. They're limited to identifying exploits for their own benefit or others'.
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#28actually not "all" projects .. where's the DRM thingy source code? that's something I'd like to see
Re: Bug Report 949446: “i can see all source code of all projects”
#29actually not "all" projects .. where's the DRM thingy source code? that's something I'd like to see
You mean EME? http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=MOZ_EME
well, that's just Mozilla's response to the closed-source DRM mandatory regulation.. not the DRM thingy per-se
In Cory Doctorow words...
> Mozilla says it isn’t providing DRM; it’s providing a fully open utility that automatically fetches and installs DRM from Adobe’s servers. I am unconvinced that there is a meaningful distinction between “installing DRM” and “installing code that installs DRM”.
By using this technique they provide DRM capabilities, without an actual implementation, or worst including blobs; but that doesn't mean that firefox does not have that "thingy" inside.. it's not there at compile-time.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-cl...