Newbie question on code vetting

[Ben Finney]

<william.boquist at gte.net> writes:

> I hope the following message will not result in scorn being heaped
> upon me.

We try to heap scorn not upon individuals, but upon scorn-worthy ideas.

Also, we heap scorn upon people who heap their responses on top of the
quoted material. Please don't top-post.

> It seems to me that Open Source generally would be more pervasive if
> there was more transparency with respect to the practices observed
> within the projects.

You mean like publicly-accessible and archived developer discussion
forums? Bug tracking systems which anyone can submit to? Source code
with copyright statements and license grants directly in the files for
anyone to examine?

Who is it that needs to improve their transparency, again?

I would love for all software vendors to be held to this standard. Are
you suggesting your organisation expects some higher level of
transparency from free software, when it happily accepts a far lower
level of transparency from proprietary vendors?

(good sigmonster, have a biscuit)

-- 
 \        "The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must |
  `\     not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true."  |
_o__)                                               -- Albert Einstein |
Ben Finney