From nobody Wed Aug 9 19:44:49 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-advocacy@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RLgW81RVmz4mCvJ for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 19:44:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyrus@bsdmail.com) Received: from mout.gmx.com (mout.gmx.com [74.208.4.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mout.gmx.com", Issuer "GeoTrust TLS RSA CA G1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RLgW71DbFz3Zx3 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 19:44:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyrus@bsdmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of pyrus@bsdmail.com has no SPF policy when checking 74.208.4.200) smtp.mailfrom=pyrus@bsdmail.com; dmarc=none Received: from [172.56.14.165] ([172.56.14.165]) by web-mail.mail.com (3c-app-mailcom-lxa14.server.lan [10.76.45.15]) (via HTTP); Wed, 9 Aug 2023 21:44:49 +0200 List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-advocacy List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: pyrus aboris To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: idea of loose open standards between FreeBSD, other BSD's, similar operating systems and non-viral software Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 21:44:49 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:HML/DvOI3Tyspp5pIXoPwWYIgcvfei2WAsE5zAO3FqMKfft8YWw7rRDPCTLToxIdZM/5D 6+g14e/zZ5Dm/Fdx362FhJvlz/OxiVCwVv8RPUORbH6wDiVSvJYTXVkd6daz7tO+OjEuGgBE9W8V 7nwGp7iGY1oR+ErCeDrKTvIFS929B8Q22PmmWFMUthE2ICPTFPWbkJOtpzdGGcsJHe0Iyu42IyUX bIbIxkMNPt1210uLxl0JRGneVK0rsn1CpTdYu960dtRNqAXmM6E7GeNKu8J8ILBYVIXA1OJpofYP 1c= X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:B1MkHdTuZmo=;WHLw78sLbfzBrgzO8G5RYRkaxIV CafkaIiCmJuJHzZOClDvikTroOwYvu40VtpWN1/fQNLq5eP17ba4qlYJBapMsmotLSSH2EQuu ecEqIObt/WDJSYNh0QL09GFxLrO/hMxGeOj44WCKuwBZWQZ6SejsUDIy4WDeWHEhV2weME4gq pAXiF1HuyHyc1R7qpUmLoyonm31IOmRbsGcHfCXQZKfgYQWGSe9dx0m4uC9vt7X9AGICyHJJ8 i68HiYH4TxkGpwICp844bcNlxvuL9xI9oBI7V7Yboboula89uja2pNHMQHG3wr6RO9xqf1IQF 7fccfdtyRv4h7sm/6cgOMgVChnOCrk6i25jWi/5AXotyqHDlaAlNKBb8LrHE73uGNrcr/y46o zbH4NLdeHO5mgy212mkkcPm/MKEvruzgU0TxiiswLxEODm4+EPg4+OH4MS6J2Bzeh0gEx7Y9Z n6YZ/3xcoIMpPZOmRzJyzvW5tuj1DHTS0eVgcUy2lw3HWwiU9Qbn36+HmmBMb+E8Se94YVHK6 mUBL40qNBh7G65WyywV2n7z/SE/jFGfGjNo6oAYe0gV5Y+1ov5nA8Pc2Cx3PPm3iAnNSdialJ KSAlus1D6QuIizcMa/0BgqzVvMBCb7p/v4wfVPYGjqTgRgiBwxctWUExczV02BN6CAd002M/u b3wouMAiwtWWGVjl0hi1MMrS5QK+OGm9lrKSHOGGdCWc0AcAxE9zYAAWc0NQjgFWnJ1R11WhV 3G5BC7YXmAlKKqb8SYwSttFGdlDzJU3y6CSdbEu04cBR5W+0J0OF8xohrRXUGldRRvVgXhPol ZZ2Y2iootwaKwP8VsF0UyKpUaFZkKjbEh+IX+UZQvXrownD2/nlMTpM22EACiJqZXUpbJIvMI wXQCr7KKZX0JUtw== X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.83 / 15.00]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.97)[0.966]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.60)[-0.601]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.26)[0.264]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_VERYGOOD(-0.20)[74.208.4.200:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[74.208.4.200:from]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[bsdmail.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_X_PRIO_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[bsdmail.com]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8560, ipnet:74.208.0.0/16, country:DE]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[bsdmail.com] X-Spamd-Bar: + X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4RLgW71DbFz3Zx3 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!