NASA’s open source activities

[GreyGeek]

The Plan for Code

Today we are launching code.nasa.gov, the latest member of the open NASA web family. Through this website, we will continue, unify, and expand NASA’s open source activities. The site will serve to surface existing projects, provide a forum for discussing projects and processes, and guide internal and external groups in open development, release, and contribution.

It's about time!

http://code.nasa.gov/

[Jonas]

Re: NASA’s open source activities

Kool! I'm impressed by the amount of gratis material they have at NASA, nice to see that they make a stand on free standards.

"NASA Open Source Agreement" - what does that mean really? Is it GPL?

thanks for sharing GG

/Jonas

[HalationEffect]

Re: NASA’s open source activities

"NASA Open Source Agreement" - what does that mean really? Is it GPL?

It's just the name of the license that NASA releases open source code under. It's an entirely separate license to GPL.

According to the Wikipedia entry for NASA's license:

The NASA Open Source Agreement (NOSA) is an OSI-approved software license.

However...

The Free Software Foundation, however, raises issue with the following clause:

G. Each Contributor represents that its Modification is believed to be Contributor's original creation and does not violate any existing agreements, regulations, statutes or rules, and further that Contributor has sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this Agreement.

The FSF states that “free software development depends on combining code from third parties”, and because of this requirement that changes be your “original creation” the license is not a free software licence

[GreyGeek]

Re: NASA’s open source activities

....
"NASA Open Source Agreement" - what does that mean really? Is it GPL?
...

The NASA Open Source Agreement is here:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/nasa1.3

But,

The NASA Open Source Agreement was accepted as an open source license. The Free Software Foundation, however, raises issue with the following clause:

G. Each Contributor represents that its Modification is believed to be Contributor's original creation and does not violate any existing agreements, regulations, statutes or rules, and further that Contributor has sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this Agreement.

The FSF states that “free software development depends on combining code from third parties”, and because of this requirement that changes be your “original creation” the license is not a free software licence.[2]

Like many licenses that claim to be "like" the GPL, this one doesn't stop you from using your own modified version, but it does restrict how you can pass on the code and include your modifications. Hence, it thwarts the paradigm of the "Cathedral" development, where everyone benefits from the code contributed by everyone. This sort of takes the bloom off of the rose.

[Chopstick]

Re: NASA’s open source activities

This is an interesting Google code project which has a similar aim:
http://code.google.com/p/open-gistemp/

I'm wondering if this clause (G) has something to do with academic conduct and protecting researchers, but I'm not sure how. It kinda depends how you choose to interpret "original"...