Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 05, 2006 04:40 AM
The author is not trying to be a daft. He clearly states, “Now, I am no petty proscriptivist. English is a dynamic, productive language in which nouns can become verbs, and verbs can return the favor.”
I think the point of the article is the eventual use of “opensource” like a commercial buzzword term (similar to broadband, etc.). I think the author is arguing that the mere acts of taking a proprietary software product, changing its license, and releasing the sourcecode to the public does not “opensource” it, but rather is just the beginning. He is trying to say that opensourcing (for formerly-proprietary software) is a process, involving community participation.
The author is not trying to proscribe usage of the opensource for the purpose of keeping the English language static, but instead, he doesn’t want opensource to lose its true meaning and become solely a marketing term.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Dont be daft
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 05, 2006 04:40 AMI think the point of the article is the eventual use of “opensource” like a commercial buzzword term (similar to broadband, etc.). I think the author is arguing that the mere acts of taking a proprietary software product, changing its license, and releasing the sourcecode to the public does not “opensource” it, but rather is just the beginning. He is trying to say that opensourcing (for formerly-proprietary software) is a process, involving community participation.
The author is not trying to proscribe usage of the opensource for the purpose of keeping the English language static, but instead, he doesn’t want opensource to lose its true meaning and become solely a marketing term.
#