Talk:OpenCD

Merger proposal

I propose merging the info from this article into OpenDisc and then turing the page into a redirect to there since The OpenCD isn't being developed anymore and the OpenDisc is a continuation of it. -- Limulus 23:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Please don't merge the two articles because from TheOpenCD article people can still discover and reach active derivatives of TheOpenCD (like the Italian Edition: http://linux.studenti.polito.it/ileana.php). If you merge the articles surely there will be no space for derivatives of TheOpenCD :( Furthermore OpenDisc is itself a derivative since the project doesn't respect the original choices of TheOpenCD (i.e. including only OSI Approved software, documenting licenses, ...). TheOpenCD and OpenDisc are two different things. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.14.231.190 (talk) 10:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy with either direction, but I will correct the previous anonymous comment, in that we don't respect the original choices of TheOpenCD.

I ran that project for over eighteen months so I can say without doubt that we never had an OSI approval rule. I'm not at all sure at what you're getting at with documenting licences - all software was OSS, and as developers don't have to include a licence in the installer (check this if you don't believe me) neither did we.

TheOpenCD is no longer a project, so the "TheOpenCD and OpenDisc are different" argument is redundant - the Italian spin-off (which I'm assuming the anonymous poster represents) developed their disc further and widened the range of software, which is great and I wish them continued success.

Finally, OpenDisc isn't a derivative simply because it's a replacement for the core project, not an off-shoot tailored for a particular purpose or market.

Whomever is to choose, I wanted you to have all the information to make your decision. Chris Gray (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC) (OpenDisc Project Lead)

About the 'OSI approval rule', in the OpenCD wikipedia page we read "The OpenCD team screens programs for stability, quality, and ease of installation, and *only distributes programs available under an OSI-approved open source license*", so i guess the OSI approval is one of the criteria applied in choosing software on disc. Also the README on the CD states the same 1 and the OSI logo was also included on the disc label 2. Since OpenDisc includes TrueCrypt that is not OSI licensed the "rule" is broken. OpenDisc is a great project but it lacks a bit of the original attention to such things like strictly adhere to OSI licenses and include links to full text of each software license in the software description pages. These things were great at educating end users about OpenSource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.4.222.15 (talk) 01:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm against the merge. OpenCD was sponsored by Canonical while OpenDisc is an independent effort. That's why they need to stay separate. Azrael Nightwalker (talk) 14:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)