Mailing List Archive

On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Mark Hammond wrote:

> I just read a statement early in our book - "Python is an Open Source tool,
> ...".
>
> Is this "near enough"? Should I avoid this term in preference for
> something more generic (ie, even simply dropping the caps?) - but the
> OS(tm) idea seems doomed anyway...

It's not certified Open Source, but my understanding is that ESR believes
the Python license would qualify if GvR applied for certification.

BTW, you won't be able to avoid flames about something or other, and given
that you're writing a Win32 book, you'll be flamed by both pseudo-ESRs and
pseudo-RMSs, all Anonymous Cowards. =)

--david

> On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Mark Hammond wrote:
>
> > I just read a statement early in our book - "Python is an Open Source tool,
> > ...".
> >
> > Is this "near enough"? Should I avoid this term in preference for
> > something more generic (ie, even simply dropping the caps?) - but the
> > OS(tm) idea seems doomed anyway...
>
> It's not certified Open Source, but my understanding is that ESR believes
> the Python license would qualify if GvR applied for certification.

I did, months ago, and haven't heard back yet. My current policy is
to drop the initial caps and say "open source" -- most people don't
know the difference anyway.

> BTW, you won't be able to avoid flames about something or other, and given
> that you're writing a Win32 book, you'll be flamed by both pseudo-ESRs and
> pseudo-RMSs, all Anonymous Cowards. =)

I don't have the time to read slashdot -- can anyone summarize what
ESR and RMS were flaming about?

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

> I did, months ago, and haven't heard back yet. My current policy is
> to drop the initial caps and say "open source" -- most people don't
> know the difference anyway.

and "Open Source" cannot be trademarked anyway...

> I don't have the time to read slashdot -- can anyone summarize what
> ESR and RMS were flaming about?

the usual; RMS wrote in saying that 1) he's not part of the
open source movement, 2) open source folks don't under-
stand the real meaning of the word freedom, and 3) he's
not a communist. ESR response is here:

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/shut-up-and-show-them.html

... OSI's tactics work. That's the easy part of the lesson.
The hard part is that the FSF's tactics don't work, and
never did. ... So the next time RMS, or anybody else,
urges you to "talk about freedom", I urge you to reply
"Shut up and show them the code."

imo, the best thing is of course to ignore them both, and
continue to ship great stuff under a truly open license...

</F>

>>>>> "FL" == Fredrik Lundh <fredrik@pythonware.com> writes:

FL> imo, the best thing is of course to ignore them both, and
FL> continue to ship great stuff under a truly open license...

Agreed, of course. I think given the current state of affairs
(i.e. the non-trademarkability of "Open Source", but also the mind
share that little-oh, little-ess has gotten), we should say that
Python (and JPython) are "open source" projects and let people make up
their own minds about what that means.

waiting-for-guido's-inevitable-faq-entry-ly y'rs,
-Barry