Re: Draft 2 -- letter to EAC commissioners

From: Edward Cherlin <edward_dot_cherlin_at_etssg_dot_com>
Date: Tue May 11 2004 - 01:12:12 CDT

On Monday 10 May 2004 20:08, Arthur Keller wrote:
> At 9:22 PM -0400 5/10/04, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
> >As you *explore open source voting*, it is important to *keep
> > in mind* that Open Source does
> >not simply mean letting people look at the source code. To
> > achieve the greatest public benefit, engineers must be able
> > to test the code, make *public contributions
> >to the source code*, and publish their findings for public

Perhaps "submissions of source code changes for expert review"

> > discussion.
>
> I completely disagree that open source has to mean that the
> public may make contributions to the source code. This
> concept may well be portrayed as frightening, as allowing
> backdoors to be surreptitiously inserted. Instead, we could
> say "inspect and test the code, publicly report bugs and track
> fixes for them, and publish....

Open Source certainly does not mean that just anybody can
contribute to the source tree, although it does and must mean
that people can change the code and test the changes themselves,
and that anybody can offer changes to the maintainers of the
source tree, who then have the right to ignore cranks and
meddlers, ahh, that is (ahem!), reject contributions that turn
out not to advance the goals of the development project.

> Best regards,
> Arthur

-- 
Edward Cherlin, Simputer Evangelist
Encore Technologies (S) Pte. Ltd.
New voices in the global conversation
http://www.ryze.com/go/Cherlin
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:33 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT