[Discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 11
catarina at openmaterials.org
Thu Mar 7 14:48:00 UTC 2013
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Tom Igoe <tom.igoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with you in that I don't consider a project open until I see the
> files. But I can imagine why someone would want to advertise that a product
> *will be * open once released, yet not release the files while raising
> money through crowdfunding.
> Since the definition is just that, there's no need for oshwa to take in a
> case like this. We could say it's not best practice, that's about it.
> Out of curiosity, anyone tracked the number of oshw projects on
> kickstarter and indiegogo? Catarina?
Not really. A sign that the movement is growing is that I'm simply unable
to count projects at this point - they're too numerous and it's hard to
keep up. We need an OSHW directory - email about that coming up.
> Matt Maier <blueback09 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I honestly don't understand why it's a question. No amount of intention
>> ever makes a project open source. Only releasing the files so that everyone
>> else can participate makes a project open source. The difference between
>> "open" and "not open" is public files. That's literally the only
>> difference. So prior to releasing the files to the public, the project is
>> not open. After releasing them, the project is open.
>> If a project owner intends to release the project files at some point in
>> the future then they can say they intend for the project to be open, but
>> they can't say that it is open; at least not yet.
>> Maybe OSHWA could have an "open pending" mark kind of like "patent
>> pending." Maybe it could be good for a year. That way project owners could
>> put "open source" next to their project, even when the files haven't
>> actually been released yet, and they'd have a reasonable amount of time to
>> finish the process later.
>>> Message: 3
>>> Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 10:52:21 -0500
>>> From: Tom Igoe <tom.igoe at gmail.com>
>>> To: The Open Source Hardware Association Discussion List
>>> <discuss at lists.oshwa.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 6
>>> Message-ID: <30F586C7-32FA-4039-BE62-267B02D9D3B8 at gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>> I'd agree with that, though it's an interesting question for things like
>>> Kickstarter campaigns. Do you release the files when you start your
>>> kickstarter campaign, or when you ship?
>>> On Mar 2, 2013, at 10:49 AM, David A. Mellis wrote:
>>> > Personally, I think it's okay to use "open-source hardware" and the
>>> logo as long as the design files are released with the product. Before
>>> release, the distinction between "is" and "will be" seems like a subtle one
>>> -- for everything about the product, not just whether or not it's
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL: <
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>>> End of discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 11
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss