Open Source by iansmate


									                                     Open Source

"Open source is software development methods that include source code, and permit such usage or
any changes to the source code. So, open source is how the development / distribution software that
allows      anyone       to   obtain,     modify,     and     redistribute     the     software.     "
If translated directly, open source means "open source". The point is that the source code is not
closed (proprietary) so as to make open source software can be developed by anyone. Not only
software,                       but                       also                         documentation.
A software created by writing code, and change it in the form of machine language that makes the
line code can be executed by a machine which then form the illusion in our brains about a virtual
working tools that we agree to call it, software. Regardless of any language used by the coder, for
some C + +, Java, PHP, Perl, Pascal, BASIC, or even Nusa, software is a collection of structured
algorithm code. Once written, the code needs to be changed into binary form to be executed by a
computer processor. Computers do not understand, comprehend, or even process any information,
except for two binary digits zero and one. The process of making this program that is often missed
by educators, teachers, students and even anywhere in Indonesia, so many misunderstandings and
finally assume the computer is a magical object. No, the computer is just an idiot thing was fantastic
being able to perform binary calculations of millions and even billions of times per second. This is
what makes computers so special. How can students understand the software without knowing the
process                            to                            make                              it?

As mentioned, the software is a collection of structured algorithm code. Some people feel has the
advantage on her left brain, and they feel good logic. Of course it's all they prove it by creating
software that is commensurate with their intelligence, such as Photoshop, 3D Studio Max, Maya,
AutoCAD, Microsoft Office, McAfee Antivirus, and others. See how gemilangnya all the software!
We all understand the nature of man is to use what they have. They all give prices on the software
they make, because they are indeed entitled to sell the results of brain squeeze it. Not a few cost
needed to develop software like it, just look at 3D Studio Max. How complex and wonderful
software! Very professional and certainly too expensive! The price can be thousands of dollars,
commensurate with results that can be achieved if you can take advantage of 3D Studio Max very
well. Making a movie box-office entrance for example? How much gross profit film producer is
selling because its 3D segments using 3d Studio Max? Is worth if it is priced at that. But an honest
price is only rewarded with fair pay abroad. Other countries have also realized the importance of
IPR. But in our country? Considered crazy if you insist on buying the original software just because
you want to improve the appreciation of intellectual property rights in Indonesia. They said, "Do not
you                   be                    so                   idealistic                  people!".
For most people, software as well as handicrafts. We are free menjualbelikannya. And of course to
be a software protected by the rule copypaste called TRIPS. Everyone must respect the intellectual
property rights that have been painstakingly developed. Piracy is a crime. IT people must
understand this sentence is true, and appreciate it. Why in Indonesia there is no appreciation of IPR?
(Written that way because to say "NO" too bersiko). Indonesia answer is because people have not
felt tired to create software. There, a lot of good programmers in Indonesia, but whether the
Indonesian people themselves know they exist? What are sufficient for comparison with outside
software vendors? Does Indonesia have a lot of ISVs are successful? Not yet. We are still too left
behind with other countries about the development of IT infrastructure. Because we still lack
knowledge about IT then our appreciation to adikaryanya also still lacking. Let's see, what you
Transtool purchased with 5000 silver price? Or borrow from friends? Even the software made by
the nation itself was not appreciated at all. Actually, this is based on the (hood) Indonesia's own fat
people who like do not want to know the distress of others. Primary education is very influential on
the                (hood)                 fat                  of               a                nation.
Are there any solutions to fix our bagsa attitude that suffer this? Will our nation is called a thief by
another nation? Had we a nation that enough money, maybe every software that we need can we
buy with our own money. The number of piracy could be suppressed even though it is impossible
menihilkannya. The only way is to fix our education is too arrogant and did not ever provide real
education to the students the importance of manners. What happens if the Bung Karno still alive
today? Maybe cry. But among this chaos there is a new solution that appeared before us, open
source name.

The concept of open source and free sharing of technological information existed long before
computers. For example, cooking recipes have been shared since the beginning of human culture.
Open source can pertain to businesses and to computers, software and technology.
In the early years of automobile development, a group of capital monopolists owned the rights to a
2 cycle gasoline engine patent originally filed by George B. Selden. By controlling this patent, they
were able to monopolize the industry and force car manufacturers to adhere to their demands, or
risk a lawsuit. In 1911, independent automaker Henry Ford won a challenge to the Selden patent.
The result was that the Selden patent became virtually worthless and a new association (which
would eventually become the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association) was formed. The new
association instituted a cross-licensing agreement among all US auto manufacturers: although each
company would develop technology and file patents, these patents were shared openly and without
the exchange of money between all the manufacturers. Until the US entered World War 2, 92 Ford
patents were being used freely by other manufacturers who were in turn making use of 515 patents
from other companies, all without lawsuits or the exchange of money.
Very similar to open standards, researchers with access to Advanced Research Projects Agency
Network (ARPANET) used a process called Request for Comments to develop telecommunication
network protocols. This collaborative process of the 1960s led to the birth of the Internet in 1969.
Early instances of open source and free software include IBM's source releases of its operating
systems and other programs in the 1950s and 1960s, and the SHARE user group that formed to
facilitate the exchange of software. Open source on the Internet began when the Internet was just a
message board, and progressed to more advanced presentation and sharing forms like a Web site.
There are now many Web sites, organizations and businesses that promote open source sharing of
everything from computer code to mechanics of improving a product, technique, or medical
The label “open source” was adopted by some people in the free software movement at a strategy
session held at Palo Alto, California, in reaction to Netscape's January 1998 announcement of a
source code release for Navigator. The group of individuals at the session included Christine
Peterson who suggested “open source”, Todd Anderson, Larry Augustin, Jon Hall, Sam Ockman,
Michael Tiemann and Eric S. Raymond. Over the next week, Raymond and others worked on
spreading the word. Linus Torvalds gave an all-important sanction the following day. Phil Hughes
offered a pulpit in Linux Journal. Richard Stallman, pioneer of the free software movement, flirted
with adopting the term, but changed his mind. Those people who adopted the term used the
opportunity before the release of Navigator's source code to free themselves of the ideological and
confrontational connotations of the term "free software". Netscape released its source code under
the Netscape Public License and later under the Mozilla Public License.
The term was given a big boost at an event organized in April 1998 by technology publisher Tim
O'Reilly. Originally titled the “Freeware Summit” and later known as the “Open Source Summit”,
The event brought together the leaders of many of the most important free and open source projects,
including Linus Torvalds, Larry Wall, Brian Behlendorf, Eric Allman, Guido van Rossum, Michael
Tiemann, Paul Vixie, Jamie Zawinski of Netscape, and Eric Raymond. At that meeting, the
confusion caused by the name free software was brought up. Tiemann argued for “sourceware” as a
new term, while Raymond argued for “open source.” The assembled developers took a vote, and the
winner was announced at a press conference that evening. Five days later, Raymond made the first
public call to the free software community to adopt the new term. The Open Source Initiative was
formed shortly thereafter.
Starting in the early 2000s, a number of companies began to publish a portion of their source code
to claim they were open source, while keeping key parts closed. This led to the development of the
now widely used terms free open source software and commercial open source software to
distinguish between truly open and hybrid forms of open source.

Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source
software must comply with the following criteria:

1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of
an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license
shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
Rationale: By constraining the license to require free redistribution, we eliminate the temptation to
throw away many long-term gains in order to make a few short-term sales dollars. If we didn't do
this, there would be lots of pressure for cooperators to defect.

2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as
compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a
well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost
preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred
form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not
allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
Rationale: We require access to un-obfuscated source code because you can't evolve programs
without modifying them. Since our purpose is to make evolution easy, we require that modification
be made easy.

3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed
under the same terms as the license of the original software.
Rationale: The mere ability to read source isn't enough to support independent peer review and
rapid evolutionary selection. For rapid evolution to happen, people need to be able to experiment
with and redistribute modifications.
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license
allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the
program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from
modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version
number from the original software.
Rationale: Encouraging lots of improvement is a good thing, but users have a right to know who is
responsible for the software they are using. Authors and maintainers have reciprocal right to know
what they're being asked to support and protect their reputations.

Accordingly, an open-source license must guarantee that source be readily available, but may
require that it be distributed as pristine base sources plus patches. In this way, "unofficial" changes
can be made available but readily distinguished from the base source.

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the maximum diversity of
persons and groups should be equally eligible to contribute to open sources. Therefore we forbid
any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process.

Some countries, including the United States, have export restrictions for certain types of software.
An OSD-conformant license may warn licensees of applicable restrictions and remind them that
they are obliged to obey the law; however, it may not incorporate such restrictions itself.

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor.
For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for
genetic research.
Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent open source
from being used commercially. We want commercial users to join our community, not feel excluded
from it.

7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without
the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
Rationale: This clause is intended to forbid closing up software by indirect means such as requiring
a non-disclosure agreement.

8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a particular
software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed
within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should
have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.
Rationale: This clause forecloses yet another class of license traps.
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed
software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same
medium must be open-source software.
Rationale: Distributors of open-source software have the right to make their own choices about
their own software.

Yes, the GPL v2 and v3 are conformant with this requirement. Software linked with GPLed libraries
only inherits the GPL if it forms a single work, not any software with which they are merely

10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.
Rationale: This provision is aimed specifically at licenses which require an explicit gesture of
assent in order to establish a contract between licensor and licensee. Provisions mandating so-called
"click-wrap" may conflict with important methods of software distribution such as FTP download,
CD-ROM anthologies, and web mirroring; such provisions may also hinder code re-use.
Conformant licenses must allow for the possibility that (a) redistribution of the software will take
place over non-Web channels that do not support click-wrapping of the download, and that (b) the
covered code (or re-used portions of covered code) may run in a non-GUI environment that cannot
support popup dialogues.

reference : from many source
see other on

To top