

The computer programming language known as "open source code" - jchonphoenix
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN3026798220101130

======
russellallen
I love it when outsiders to a community (like journalists) get things like
this wrong, because it makes me rethink my mental categories.

We have absorbed a culturally agreed set of differences between a computer
language, a platform, a framework, a library, an OS... and we're comfortable
with licencing being coextensive with these units without getting confused,
for example.

~~~
asnyder
I'm not so sure about the library vs framework agreement. Many packages that
would historically be labeled libaries, now call themselves a framework,
making it even harder for the real frameworks to stand out among the clutter.

~~~
bodhi
Isn't the difference generally that a library is used by client code, whereas
client code sits 'inside' (for varying levels of inside) a framework? That's
my rule-of-thumb anyway.

~~~
jedbrown
There's certainly a continuum, almost any decent library can be extended by
user code.

------
madd_o
This phrase, spoken by someone who doesn't know anything about the subject,
contains an unrelated grain of truth.

Today's projects are cobbled together by giants sections of open source code,
customized for specific purposes. A project may span languages, and usually
includes more than one.

His ignorance made me appreciate the meta-programming language one could call
"open source code."

------
lenni
To be fair when I talk about, say, legal issues I tend to blurt out dangerous
half-truths that I deduct from supposed 'first principles'. On the other hand
I would never write an article on the law like this person has done.

------
w1ntermute
This makes me wonder whether all the articles out there on other stuff
contains errors like this too.

~~~
dflock
They do. If you've ever had anything of yours reported in the press, you will
discover that almost all articles are like this one.

~~~
taylorbuley
It doesn't have to be that way

~~~
dflock
Well, I'm sure it doesn't, but it mostly is. Suggestions?

~~~
krakensden
ArsTechnica seems to be getting it right, and the other day I heard NPR call
up one of their editors as an expert, so the mainstream news is noticing
something.

I think the real problem is, most consumers don't know what they're missing.

------
lukejduncan
Many journalist have invented their own language known as "the newspaper" to
be sold public streets at low cost, but profitability issues are murky.

------
iwr
Why would this guy bother copying stuff off the Goldman servers when it was
open source, and presumably freely available?

~~~
SpikeGronim
I think that he claimed that the code was open source, but in fact it was
proprietary.

~~~
wtracy
Reading between the lines, this is my guess as to what's going on:

Goldman Sachs built an internal-use-only tool that relied on some GPL code.
Aleynikov is going to claim that this made Goldman Sach's code fall under the
GPL, and therefore he has a right to redistribute it.

I hope that's not what's going on, because the pointy-haired ones don't need
another reason to be afraid of FOSS.

~~~
woid
That is not how GPL works. Let's say you have derived work from GPLed source
(DW).

if (you publish binary of DW) then {you have to provide sources of DW under
GPL}

Simply it does not apply to in-house (non-published) work. You are fine to
keep it closed-source.

