Announcing Rome Tools, Inc.

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by throwaway91_82 on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @01:04PM (#27039823)

this team also has had at least one example of unilateral non-open source decisionmaking https://www.vice.com/en/article/pawnwv/open-source-devs-reve...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by vosper on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @01:49PM (#27040369)

Is it a given that because the software is open-source, the decision-making will be, too? Almost seems there should be a separate set of claims for what the decision-making process will be (like how there are various software licenses).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by ipsum2 on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @02:01PM (#27040523)

From the article:

> Eric Raymond, the founder of the Open Source Initiative and one of the authors of the standard-bearing Open Source Definition, said Kyle’s decision violated the fifth clause of the definition, which prohibits discrimination against people or groups.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by spenczar5 on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @06:49PM (#27043827)

Okay, so the issue wasn't decision-making, then, and you agree with the parent comment that open source need not have open decision-making?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by sebastianmck on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @02:06PM (#27040597)

The Rome license will stay MIT.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing Rome Tools, Inc. by threatofrain on Tuesday May 04, 2021 @02:11PM (#27040680)

Linus is probably a tie-breaker, and thus a unilateral decision maker for Linux when necessary too. What's the problem?

[ Parent | on HN ]