Re: Quality control in open source development
Dave wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. The PSF relies on the Python core developers to maintain quality. As far as redistribution is concerned there are requirements to describe the changes made to the basic Python distribution in derived works. As far as calling it Python is concerned, the PSF maintains a trademark on the word Python used to describe computer software. An informal description of PSF policy on uses of the trademark can be found at http://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/ regards Steve -- Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Quality control in open source development
With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! In some projects, there's trademarks on the project name (for example, Linus owns the Linux trademark), so you can mitigate confusion that way. I don't know if the PSF owns the Python trademarks or not. You can't stop them from forking and releasing their own code, even if it's really bad. That's freedom for you. How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? I think it's pretty self-evident that it's not a huge problem, don't you? Do you see lots of low quality python forks cluttering up the internet? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
Dave wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. The hit men from the PSU will take care of that. But I'm not supposed to talk ab -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
Dave wrote: If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. From http://www.python.org/psf/summary/ --- The PSF also holds and protects the trademarks behind the Python programming language. This includes the Python name, when used in the domain of programming languages, and also the Python logos. Python is a registered trademark in the US, while the logos have not yet been registered. --- Christian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
On Oct 8, 8:43 am, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. Most trademark violations have occurred, to the best of my recollection, by commercial entities trying to usurp the popularity of an open-source endeavor for their own commercial gain. It is very rare that another in the open-source community will commandeer the good name of another project for his own purposes. This gives strong credence to the idea that the highly participatory nature of the open-source community serves as a strong, self-enforcing deterrent to negative acts of this nature. As far as quality assurance itself goes, independent, third-party unit test suites are easily engineered. Parties who do manage to succeed in releasing their own Python 2.7 can do so only by either making their product compatible with this third-party verification suite, or by not doing so. This leads to two situations: (1) If compatible, then the name Python 2.7 may well be accepted by the community, even if only in an allegorical sense (e.g., If PSF released Python 2.7, this product is how I envision it'd be like.). Alternatively, people will recognize the product as being Python- compatible, but otherwise an independent line of development -- e.g., a fork. The PSF can then release under a new set of version numbers (where everyone understands that 2.7 is an independent fork not endorsed by PSF), persue negotiations (ultimately terminating in legal action) to arrive at an acceptable product name, etc. If the PSF were feeling particularly benevolent, they could even accept some ideas from the 2.7 release into their own branch of development. (2) If incompatible, the product will gather a reputation of inferiority rapidly, and those clearly interested in Python will neither want nor have anything to do with this misbranded malfeasance. Again, independent verification is an example of the participatory nature of the community at large, and is a prime example of how concerned citizens can act collectively in their own interest, independently, to help ensure the quality of a socially-accepted product. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
Dave wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? Maybe their code is terrible, and not even compatible with the rest of Python! How can the PSF, for example, maintain the quality and coheren of new code contributed to be part of Python, or derivative works that claim to be some future version of Python? If licensees can redisribute as they like, isn't this a huge problem? Is this dealt with be restricting use of the Python trademarks? Just curious.. The Python license says: In the event Licensee prepares a derivative work that is based on or incorporates Python 3.0c1 or any part thereof, and wants to make the derivative work available to others as provided herein, then Licensee hereby agrees to include in any such work a brief summary of the changes made to Python 3.0c1. Other licenses specify that derivatives use a different name or even distribute changes as a patch for the unchanged original. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
I think it's pretty self-evident that it's not a huge problem, don't you? Do you see lots of low quality python forks cluttering up the internet? hardly any...the best python fork I found: http://www.woopit.com/albums/Australian-snakes/GreenPythonSnake.jpg though they look more like tweezers than a fork... gdr -tkc -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
On Oct 8, 8:43 am, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the open source licenses that allow redistribution of modified code, how do you keep someone unaffiliated with the Python community from creating his or her own version of python, and declaring it to be Python 2.6, or maybe Python 2.7 without any approval of anyone at the PSF? How are they going to declare that their version is Python 2.x? What forum would they use. Current users of python most likely look to comp.lang.python or python.org for their python update news. New users of python are likely to use google or another search engine, and probably land at python.org. Is it possible for me to take Python's source code, make some changes, and post it somewhere as Python 2.7? Yes. Will anybody notice? Not likely. Others have made some pretty sound arguments around trademarks and such, but I'm going to simply argue that Python as a community has its own inertia, and it simply isn't a practical to be concerned about a dubious fork. It simply wouldn't take off. Matt -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Quality control in open source development
Matimus wrote: Others have made some pretty sound arguments around trademarks and such, but I'm going to simply argue that Python as a community has its own inertia, and it simply isn't a practical to be concerned about a dubious fork. It simply wouldn't take off. I think this is indeed the strongest argument. If it isn't on python.org, it won't be Python 2.7 (and people won't mistake it for that). The PSF encourages alternative implementations of Python (whether as forks from the current code base, or by starting from scratch), and there are indeed several such implementations available (Jython, Stackless Python, IronPython, PyPy). Formally, people need to designate their implementation with some additional attribute, as done in this list, or even in mere repackaging (ActivePython, Enthought Python Distribution). As a matter of fact, all these people not only come up with specific names because they are required to do so, but also because they are proud of their specific product, and they *want* people to recognize that this is different (in various ways) from core Python (which they sometimes call CPython, just to make it clear that this is actually but another implementation of the Python language). Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
