Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Open Source Licensing: is StillSecure trying to redefine Open Source?
Open Source Licensing: is StillSecure trying to redefine Open Source? asks Roberto Galoppini in this April 4, 2007 post at his eponymous blog
Roberto believes that being compliant with OSI or FSF definitions should be mandatory if one wishes to call their products open source or free software...However, he finds that Cobia, StillSecure's security platform, does not strictly comply with OSI and in fact a StillSecure representative whose comments are included in the post appears to feel that compliance with OSI is not the most important issue as far delivering value to end users are concerned. Roberto, and a few others, would most likely beg to differ on that...
Interesting post, read the full discussion here
Roberto believes that being compliant with OSI or FSF definitions should be mandatory if one wishes to call their products open source or free software...However, he finds that Cobia, StillSecure's security platform, does not strictly comply with OSI and in fact a StillSecure representative whose comments are included in the post appears to feel that compliance with OSI is not the most important issue as far delivering value to end users are concerned. Roberto, and a few others, would most likely beg to differ on that...
Interesting post, read the full discussion here
Labels: compliance, it-security, opinion, osi
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]