Re: Forwarded from the orocos list ...

>>>>> "BK" == Bob Koninckx <[email protected]> writes:

    BK> On Tue, 2003-05-20 at 21:42,

    BK> Henrik,

    BK> I think you missed something. OCEAN is _not_ an open source
    BK> project in the true sense of the word. It is a european funded
    BK> project, aiming at an "open controller enabled by an advanced
    BK> RT-network". The ambition is to _use_ open source as much as
    BK> possible and to make part of the development, that is the
    BK> DCRF, publicly available after or even during the
    BK> project. That part _may_ (and hopefully will) become a true
    BK> open source project (with a large community) in the future,
    BK> thereby providing a solid basis for a truely open, vendor
    BK> neutral etc. CNC where vendors / universities / researchers
    BK> can plug in their own functionality.

    BK> I suppose it is a good idea to have this discussion on the
    BK> public ocean list instead of the orocos list though :-)

    BK> mailto:[email protected]

    BK> I am sure, F. Meo at FIDIA will correct me if I interpreted
    BK> something wrong here. Fabrizio ?

Bob

I read the OCEAN project summary prepared by Mr Meo and the first
paragraph (objectives) clearly states: this aim is an open source
implementation. The text is *VERY* clear which is the reason for my
reaction.

In addition I still think that is might become a problem if too many
ventures exploit open source without somethign being feedback to the
community. Why would I want companies to exploit open source without
some feedback? I fully understand that their might be comapny reasons
to keep some of the code (the specific code to the company) private,
but often there are general facilities that might be of utility. Such
feedback would be useful to the community. In addition I for one
would not be very responsive on mailing lists to request from
companies that utilise code without feedback to the community. It has
to be a two-way street.

Cheers

Henrik