Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 21:44:49 +0200 From: pyrus aboris <pyrus@bsdmail.com> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: idea of loose open standards between FreeBSD, other BSD's, similar operating systems and non-viral software Message-ID: <trinity-ee94c54b-e76b-4ec0-b46f-688eed0478ad-1691610289508@3c-app-mailcom-lxa14>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear FreeBSD community, =C2=A0 I would like to float the idea of a loose open standard between BSD operat= ing systems, along with similar systems like OpenIndiana, Haiku and Minix, = and BSD-like software=2E The purpose would be to increase collaboration bet= ween BSD's and similar operating systems, by making use of less effort, whi= le each can still work independently of each other=2E =C2=A0 An opensource framework would like how there are different organizations a= nd projects that use XMPP, SIP, ePUB, IAX, WebRTC, MQTT, MGCP and CAP=2E Su= ch organizations that govern opensource frameworks include IETF, XMPP found= ation, Oasis and W3C=2E =C2=A0 It wouldn't be intended as a strict set of standards, and all BSD's don't = have to comply perfectly, but standards can be voluntarily endorsed as appl= ying to a specification=2E Also, there can be competing or multiple specifi= cations=2E The point would be to promote progress on different opensource s= oftware used by FreeBSD, DragonflyBSD, NomadBSD, NetBSD OpenBSD, OpenIndian= a, etc while each operating system remains on its own terms=2E =C2=A0 For instance, OSS implementations are already used=2E It can get developer= s from all of these operating systems working together, for standardization= among OSS, Sndio, SunAudio or a BSD implementation of Portaudio=2E One sta= ndard in this would be the equivalent of an XEP or RFC of IETF=2E FreeBSD c= an choose to take part in one or multiple of these=2E =C2=A0 Other standards that would be beneficial are HID standards (which many BSD= 's already use or adopting to), compiling tool chains, development utilitie= s, build utilities, display servers (Xenocara, Xorg and/or Wayland collabor= ation) implementations, printer backends, scanner driver standards, Zerocon= f implementations and drivers for other hardware=2E =C2=A0 It can also be for software standards, which are commonly used software wi= th FreeBSD=2E Software would voluntarily verify themselves by those standar= ds, and it doesn't all have to be standardized rigidly=2E Organizations suc= h as ISC could collaborate on software standards=2E =C2=A0 There can be multiple standards for licenses as well, which are optional, = including permissive, permissive with a patent clause, non-viral and file-b= ased copyleft licenses=2E A point here, would be to make permissive and fil= e-based copyleft licenses (or non-viral licenses) first class for interoper= able use=2E LGPL would be included in first class, but also act as a glue t= o further software in the GPL=2E The best way forward with a standards organization, which can be of multip= le BSD's, similar OS's or any BSD working as an organization, would be for = loose criteria for what makes a BSD at its core, and the full operating sys= tem doesn't have to be fully under those basic standards=2E The purpose is = that it's inclusive of BSD's and similar OS's, based on what they're known = for=2E As in IETF or XEP, many standards are optional or unofficial, but ev= en the unofficial ones are implemented in a professional capacity=2E It cou= ld be run together from many BSD operating systems, or even loosely run fro= m several organizations, but the goal would be a loose cohesiveness=2E Also= , it would be useful for software that's specially developed or implemented= on different BSD's=2E =C2=A0 Thank you!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?trinity-ee94c54b-e76b-4ec0-b46f-688eed0478ad-1691610289508>