www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html

[Jeanne Rasata]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Jeanne Rasata <jrasata> 15/12/31 21:53:19

Modified files:
        philosophy     : open-source-misses-the-point.html 

Log message:
        linked to archive.org, typo

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.78&r2=1.79

Patches:
Index: open-source-misses-the-point.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html,v
retrieving revision 1.78
retrieving revision 1.79
diff -u -b -r1.78 -r1.79
--- open-source-misses-the-point.html   31 Dec 2015 20:58:00 -0000      1.78
+++ open-source-misses-the-point.html   31 Dec 2015 21:53:19 -0000      1.79
@@ -160,15 +160,15 @@
 misunderstand the term.  According to writer Neal Stephenson,
 &ldquo;Linux is &lsquo;open source&rsquo; software meaning, simply,
 that anyone can get copies of its source code files.&rdquo; I don't
-think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the
-official definition.  I think he simply applied the
-conventions of the English language to come up with a meaning for the
-term.  The state of Kansas published a similar definition:
-<!-- It was from http://da.state.ks.us/itec/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf, but
-that page is no longer available. --> &ldquo;Make use of open-source
-software (OSS).  OSS is software for which the source code is freely
-and publicly available, though the specific licensing agreements vary
-as to what one is allowed to do with that code.&rdquo;</p>
+think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the official
+definition.  I think he simply applied the conventions of the English
+language to come up with a meaning for the term.
+The <a 
href="https://web.archive.org/web/@*20001011193422/http://da.state.ks.us/ITEC/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf";>state
+of Kansas</a> published a similar definition: &ldquo;Make use of
+open-source software (OSS).  OSS is software for which the source code
+is freely and publicly available, though the specific licensing
+agreements vary as to what one is allowed to do with that
+code.&rdquo;</p>
 
 <p>The <i>New York
 Times</i> <a 
href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@
 are <a 
href="http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/aug/27/texas-teenager-water-purifier-toxic-e-waste-pollution";>published
 without a patent</a>.  Patent-free equipment designs can be laudable
 contributions to society, but the term &ldquo;source code&rdquo; does
-not pertain to it.</p>
+not pertain to them.</p>
 
 <p>Open source supporters try to deal with this by pointing to their
 official definition, but that corrective approach is less effective
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2015/12/31 20:58:00 $
+$Date: 2015/12/31 21:53:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>