Open source definition does not define open source

[belovedmonster]

This page -> http://www.ubuntu.com/project/open-source

attempts to sum up open source in an end-user readable way but the page fails to actually explain what open source is! I'm not talking about semantics of free vs open source or anything like that, I'm talking about how the page literally at no point explains any of the concepts behind open source. Its like the writer sort of forgot to actually write the pertinent sentence that might enlighten the reader.

See attached picture for specific notes.

[Roz Strachan (roz-strachan)]

Yep. This was a huge oversight that we tried to temporarily sidestep by linking to the Open Source Initiative's definition.

If all are agreed, please update the page with the copy below:

Where did open source come from?

Originally coined in 1998, the term open source came out of the free software movement, a collaborative force going strong since the dawn of computing in the 1950s. This early community was responsible for the development of many of the first operating systems, software and, in 1969, the Internet itself.

The open-source community is thriving and today boasts some of the best brains in the business. The aim has not changed: free systems and software should be available to everybody, wherever they are.

Without open source, many of the systems and applications we take for granted simply would not exist. All the big players in computing come from, or owe a huge creative debt to, the open-source community, and continue to rely on its talent and expertise when developing new products.

In the spirit of open source, Ubuntu is absolutely free to download, use, share and improve however and whenever you like.

What is open source?

Open source is founded on 10 core principles:

1. Software must be free to redistribute.
2. The program must include source code.
3. The licence must allow people to experiment with and redistribute modifications.
4. Users have a right to know who is responsible for the software they are using.
5. There should be no discrimination against any person or group.
6. The licence must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field.
7. No-one should need to acquire an additional licence to use or redistribute the program.
8. The licence must not be specific to a product.
9. The licence must not restrict other software.
10. The licence must be technology-neutral

Take a look at the Open Source Initiative's definition of open-source software for a more detailed explanation.