News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by dmaz on Thursday October 20, 2011 @10:42AM (#3135030)
Cathedral and Bazaar works here
Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by durin42 on Thursday October 20, 2011 @11:12AM (#3135194)
I'm not quite sure. Chromium (the open-source end of Chrome) is very much a cathedral in the sense of product direction, but is developed in the open. I can't come up with something that has the opposite pairing though (it'd be kind of strange).

I'm all in favor of some pithy term for "source released under an open license but not developed in full view of the public."

Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by elwin on Thursday October 20, 2011 @12:55PM (#3135697)
How about "write-closed" vs. "write-open"? Or more simply, "read-only open source".
Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by nknight on Thursday October 20, 2011 @02:32PM (#3136188)
Fork-only might be more appropriate, since you're quite free to write to your copy.
Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by DrCatbox on Thursday October 20, 2011 @12:34PM (#3135621)
Shared Source is nice, or half-open source.

Or, "we take all the benefits, free workforce and goodwill of free software while retaining all control and money".

Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by dsl on Thursday October 20, 2011 @05:30PM (#3137154)
The first thing I thought of was "Shared Source", the licensing program for Windows source code.
Re:Google confirms Android 4.0 ICS is open source by rsynnott on Thursday October 20, 2011 @12:22PM (#3135555)
Most 'cathedral' products are developed at least somewhat in the open, and often do take external contributions.