[ Thanks to Kelly
McNeill for this link. ]
“The strength of Open Source comes from the fact that
there’s no single governing body.“
“The idea of corporations having power over the future of Open
Source demonstrates how incongruous or contradictory terms can
combine to form an oxymoron. Corporate power and Open Source
provide as rhetorical a figure of incongruity as the standard
analogies of deafening silence or mournful optimist.”
“The answer to the “increasingly heated question of how much
power a corporation should have over the future of open source” is:
None….”
“PC and server vendors can disrupt the Open Source desktop
projects. They can create confusion and support disruptive people
within the community. If anything last week demonstrated how they
can disrupt the KDE team. Just the perception of a threat caused
the KDE project and its sponsor to alter their licenses. So, yes,
the involvement of PC and server vendors can effect projects but
not Open Source.”
“Open Source isn’t a thing. So, no bandwagon exists. This isn’t
a question of voting. Compaq, HP, IBM and Sun can lobby and don’t
get to vote just like you and I or anyone else doesn’t get to vote.
The only way anyone votes is if they use the applications.
Otherwise, we’re not holding any elections.”