Hello,
Some of you may also have been following the debate regarding open hardware vs. open source hardware on the Open Hardware Summit lists and/or various others. The OHS updates list archives are, for some reason, private, but Bryan Bishop has kindly been forwarding to Open Manufacturing. See:
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/c9e1cd72d153a88e?hl=en&...
I have personally had some trouble with this debate in the past, and whilst we ended up being OSHUG and not OHUG, I don't find the argument that Open Hardware is, e.g. just a device with documented registers, entirely convincing. Inasmuch as it may have once meant this, but it has now come to be generally accepted that it is quite something else.
I do agree with a lot of what Bruce Perens has to say... This is not to say that I think we should drop the "S". I've not completely made my mind up, and with regards to what we are called I don't think it matters _that_ much. Bruce does make a good case, though, and I'm definitely with him on this being a movement and the importance of it being " a lot of folks going in approximately the same direction". Which is to say that we don't all have to agree on everything. It would be a shame if this ended up being another Free Software vs. Open Source type split, though.
I'm in interested as to what other folks think...
Cheers,
Andrew
On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 07:35 +0100, Andrew Back wrote:
Hello,
Some of you may also have been following the debate regarding open hardware vs. open source hardware on the Open Hardware Summit lists and/or various others. The OHS updates list archives are, for some reason, private, but Bryan Bishop has kindly been forwarding to Open Manufacturing. See:
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/c9e1cd72d153a88e?hl=en&...
I have personally had some trouble with this debate in the past, and whilst we ended up being OSHUG and not OHUG, I don't find the argument that Open Hardware is, e.g. just a device with documented registers, entirely convincing. Inasmuch as it may have once meant this, but it has now come to be generally accepted that it is quite something else.
I do agree with a lot of what Bruce Perens has to say... This is not to say that I think we should drop the "S". I've not completely made my mind up, and with regards to what we are called I don't think it matters _that_ much. Bruce does make a good case, though, and I'm definitely with him on this being a movement and the importance of it being " a lot of folks going in approximately the same direction". Which is to say that we don't all have to agree on everything. It would be a shame if this ended up being another Free Software vs. Open Source type split, though.
I'm in interested as to what other folks think...
Hi Andrew,
Keep it as OSHUG. It is important to be explicit that the source is open.
From a "neophyte" perspective, you have the advantage that OSHUG can be
pronounced (o-shug) more easily than OHUG. Particularly after a few beers, when it would become o-shug anyway :)
In any case, changing a name that has already gained some "market" credibility is a bad idea. You'll spend the next 5 years answering questions about what the connection between OSHUG and OHUG is. There are far better ways for you to spend your time!
Best wishes,
Jeremy
On 19 August 2011 08:50, Jeremy Bennett jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com wrote:
Keep it as OSHUG. It is important to be explicit that the source is open.
I get the "source" argument, but also Bruce does make a good case for not including this.
I wasn't suggesting changing the name of the group. Just interested in further opinions on this debate.
From a "neophyte" perspective, you have the advantage that OSHUG can be pronounced (o-shug) more easily than OHUG. Particularly after a few beers, when it would become o-shug anyway :)
Indeed, and this was a consideration when trying to think of a name (ease of pronunciation with or without imbibing).
In any case, changing a name that has already gained some "market" credibility is a bad idea. You'll spend the next 5 years answering questions about what the connection between OSHUG and OHUG is. There are far better ways for you to spend your time!
Ah, this was never the idea and apologies if it appeared as though I was suggesting this as a possibility. I'm more interested in the general debate. The name of our group isn't so important, but naming could have bigger implications for the wider movement, e.g. in terms of fostering understanding and its "brand".
Cheers,
Andrew
-
Andrew Back -
Jeremy Bennett