[Foundation-l] [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code

Mon Apr 17 21:18:20 UTC 2006

Dirk Riehle wrote:

>At 17.04.2006, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>  
>
>>Dirk Riehle wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>>can falter.  Additionally, as the Mozilla note mentioned,
>>>>contributions that aren't part of the mainline will likely bitrot.  (I
>>>>don't have a solution to this; just a cautionary note.)
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Well, the main solution is to create an ecosystem where people get
>>>hired to work (full-time) on providing such extensions (or additions
>>>to the mainline) to MediaWiki. Only this setup can provide some continuity.
>>>      
>>>
>>...
>>What could be more important is to ensure that anything done for free
>>stays free.  It would be shameful to have volunteer efforts tied up by
>>someone else's patents.
>>    
>>
>Is that mostly a legal concern? (I.e. ambiguity of OSS licenses?)
>
>I firmly believe that "commercial open-source software" won't fly in 
>the long run; most companies won't reach escape velocity. (Commercial 
>OSS defined here as software where a company keeps control over the 
>software, e.g. MySQL's dual-license model. MySQL is a notable 
>exception where it works because they got into the game early.)
>
>What you need is an Eclipse Foundation like setup where large 
>corporations/system integrators make money on complementary services 
>and therefore can afford "altruistic" contributions to a real 
>open-source project like MediaWiki. Well, not only "afford" but "have to". :-)
>  
>
As much as I support open source concepts I have to admit that most of 
it remains untested in the courts.  Patents can be a bigger problem than 
copyrights because they cover the ideas rather than just the expression 
of the idea.  The first person to the patent office has an advantage 
even over others who may have had the idea earlier.

Ec