HP3000 Online - MPE "Shared Source"

MPE "Shared Source" The Proposal

"Shared Source" Applied to MPE

General FAQ

EDITOR FAQ
TurboIMAGE FAQ
QUERY FAQ
Basic/V FAQ

Appendix

Downloading MPE "Shared Source"

MPE "Shared Source" Proposal

The popularity of Linux and the GNU tools and compilers, the recent free distribution of the Netscape browser, and the even more recent release of the Apple OSX server ("Darwin" project) have brought "open source" to the limelight. The belief is that the intellect and effort of many is more prolific, efficient and powerful than what a single vendor can produce. If a product is made available to the Internet public, those persons will be motivated to improve upon the original design by repairing defects and contributing enhancements, which, in turn, will be freely distributed back to the public. In fact, the Open Source Organization has 10 major requirements for publicly available source code to meet in order to be labeled "Open Source" (see the details in the Appendix).
CSY seriously considered the merits of open source. We recognized that the installed base of MPE customers and ISV's that are able and willing to understand the MPE source code, and then create enhancements, was small compared to the numbers that Apple, Netscape and Linux can attract. However, there were still advantages to CSY, Interex and our customers if we could successfully start an open source-like program for MPE. Since, initially, CSY would not meet all of the requirements of the Open Source Organization, we called our effort "Shared Source" to avoid confusion and possible legal ramifications.

"Shared Source" Applied to MPE

The simple idea:

Provide current, complete MPE source code modules on a web server accessible to the general public.
Provide an environment that allows the modules to be compiled.
Provide processes that support modifications to the module, and a means for incorporating some of these changes back into mainline MPE.
Items two and three above are the crux of the concept. To provide all of the files needed to compile even a small portion of the core MPE Operating System would take months of effort, and require CSY to make public thousands of auxiliary include files, some of which have sensitive information. To provide the processes to accept changes in these core OS files and to integrate them back into our mainline source base would also be a very large effort.
However, the basic concept of open source is powerful and we believe that we can start small to test the idea, and gauge the success of the combined efforts of HP, Interex and our customers. We hope to expand on the source offerings in the future.
For the first effort at "Shared Source", HP is offering the following modules:

QUERY (due out soon)
EDITOR
JAVA CLASS LIBRARIES
These modules were chosen because they are self-contained, relatively small and there is interest in the user community in enhancing these products.
Interex has accepted the role of hosting these Shared Source web pages, and will recommend to HP, based on user needs and user exposure, which changes should be incorporated back into MPE. Interex requires that all new versions of source code use a version ID that distinguishes it from the standard, supported HP version. Interex has chosen CVS as the distribution method that best meets our needs.
This new role for Interex could slightly change the focus of various SIGs, in that some time might be spent lobbying HP and Interex to accept certain enhancements back info the Fundamental Operating System (FOS).
HP will ultimately decide which sources to release to the "Shared Source" depot, but will use customer, ISV and Interex input in forming this decision. HP will have final responsibility for the quality and function of all code it accepts back into FOS.

FAQ

Q. Does MPE follow the standard Open Source(tm) terms and conditions?
A. No. Only a subset of the MPE source is available, although we hope that over time more source becomes public. Also, Interex, not the value-added author, controls re-distribution of derived works from the HP source.
Q. Can anyone download and read MPE source code?
A. Yes.
Q. Can I modify parts of MPE and use it for my own shop?
A. Yes, provided you meet the requirements established by Interex.
Q. Can I modify MPE and give my changes to anyone?
A. No. your changes can be used by your company alone or can be given to Interex who will distribute the changes per their policies.
Q. Can I modify MPE and sell my changes to anyone?
A. No.
Q. How will HP guarantee high quality in the code that it accepts?
A. HP is ultimately responsible for the quality of their product. Interex has criteria that must be met before a person can submit source changes back to Interex. HP will carefully inspect all source changes approved by Interex. The resulting new software will be fully supported by HP.
Q. If HP accepts MPE source code from third parties will HP continue to support MPE?
A. Yes.
Q. I have HP support for QUERY. If I modify QUERY and later have a QUERY problem that is definitely not related to the changes I made, can I still get HP Support?
A. Yes, as long as the problem can be reproduced on a supported version of Query lacking the changes you made. In other words, HP does not support derived versions of Shared Source modules.
Q. I don't have the Pascal (or SPL, etc.) compiler. How can I compile the MPE source I've downloaded?
A. You must purchase any compilers or tools required to build your product version. Any special tools required that are not purchasable would be included with the shared source.
Q. Is the "make" environment provided publicly the same environment used by CSY internally?
A. No, although there are similarities. Over time these two "build" environments will become more similar.

Appendix

The Open Source ™ Definition -- applied to MPE:
(http://www.opensource.org/osd.html)

Free Redistribution - anyone could give away or sell MPE. Neither CSY, Interex nor anyone else can collect a royalty.
Source Code - source code must be compilable, meaning all or parts of our MBE (Multiple Build Environment) must be available too.
Derived Works - changes/value added etc. can be distributed per rule One.
Integrity of The Author's Source Code - if CSY chooses to restrict distribution (in order to preserve source integrity) then we must distribute patch files that allow the source to be modified at build time.
No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor - use of MPE source could not be dictated by CSY.
Distribution of License - anyone who gets MPE has a license to use it. The concept of "user license" would disappear in a true Open Source T model.
License Must Not Be Specific to a Product - pieces of MPE could be re-distributed on their own. Rule One does not apply to MPE as a "whole" but to all of the individual pieces of MPE too.
License Must Not Contaminate Other Software - open and non-open program can be distributed together.
Conforming Licenses and Certification - the Open Source trademark can be used only by programs adhering to all of the Open Source T definitions listed above.

Other Vendors Open Source efforts:

DEC OpenVMS:
(http://www.montagar.com/hobbyist/)
What I could tell from perusing a few web sites on OpenVMS, is it available only to hobbyists. A DEC/Compaq customers cannot use the free version of OpenVMS for any commercial use, directly or indirectly.
OpenVMS is not an Open SourceT model, as used by Netscape, Apple and FSF. Instead, "hobbyists" can download a recent version of the OpenVMS operating system and "layered" software (add on items) for free. They get a one year license to use OpenVMS on certain, specific systems. After the year expires they must re-register to get another one-year license. This license is not transferable. The hobbyists must also be a current member of DECUS. The web site referred to above has different media options for obtaining OpenVMS binaries. Note: I could find nothing that indicated that source code is available - just binaries.
It was not clear how much official support users of free OpenVMS get, but they do get some support from Compaq.

Free Software Foundation (FSF)
(http://www.gnu.org/)
The Free Software Foundation has followed an Open Source model for 15 years. FSF offers several distribution formats: ftp download, CD ROM, and a "Deluxe Distribution" where they send you the binaries for your target machine (which costs you $5,000).
FSF has three roles for people downloading their sources:

read-only: the person can read the source. They can change it locally but they cannot submit the changes back to FSF
write with review: the person can submit changes back to FSF after their changes have been approved. E-mail is the method used to start the approval dialog. If the person is successful with this process for a long enough period (don't know how long) they can...
direct write: very experienced FSF programmers (probably not a lot of them?) can submit changes directly to the source tree.

Netscape's Source Code:
(http://www.mozilla.org/)
Mozilla.com is a "clearing house" for Netscape browser code. There are 4-5 full time employees that maintain their web site, freshen the source tree, run nightly jobs to compile all source that was accepted and maintain a list of module owners. They are all Netscape employees; however, they maintain a separate identity. They have no "list" on who can make source changes, but the module owners must approve the change. Currently most module owners are also Netscape employees, but the model is designed so that peoples outside of Netscape can be module owners.
Downloads of the source are available via FTP or CVS (Concurrent Versions System). Both of these methods are available on MPE.
Here are two quotes from their web pages:
'It can be observed that all successful open-source software projects follow this model of distributed development and centralized integration. One of the fears that open-source software neophytes often express is that open availability of the source will lead to balkanization, that there will eventually be thousands of different descendants of the original software, and confusion and chaos will result. But, in reality that doesn't happen; organizations like mozilla.org tend to appear. Eric Raymond tries to explain why in his excellent paper, "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". We hope to operate in the ``Bazaar'' style, and be to the public Netscape source code as Linus Torvalds is to Linux.'
Note: Mark Klein has ported CVS, a source control system used in the Bazaar approach, to MPE and I have it running (in a very restricted mode) on jazz.
'As explained earlier, those of us here at mozilla.org are not the primary coders of the Mozilla web browser. We function as a switchboard, facilitating the cooperation of the thousands of participants out on the net. And we assemble the fruit of that labor in one place. The real work gets done by people like you.'
Mozilla.org has a list called "Blue Sky" that describes future enhancements that they would like to see incorporated into the Netscape Browser.

Apple's Darwin Project
(http://www.publicsource.apple.com/)
Apple claims it is the first major computer company to make Open Source development a key part of its ongoing software strategy. Apple has adopted the Open Source model for its new OSX server operating system. Apple has a public source license and requires everyone to register to obtain a copy of the source. Apple requires anyone who modifies the source to submit the changes back to Apple (with the exception of changes for purely internal R&D;).
Apple's ASPL (Public Source License) is long and has lots of "legalize". It seems to protect Apple's Intellectual Property more than other Open Source licenses I've seen. I understand there is currently a debate about whether or not Apple's licensing conforms to the spirit of the Open Source license. However, CSY should carefully study Apple's PSL since a version similar to Apple's may better protect CSY's interests.

Please Send Interex Content Suggestions

MPE "Shared Source"

Interex Home | Search | Software Library | Inside Interex | Events Calendar | Join/Renew
Volunteer | Hot News | Publications | Conferences | Member Communication Groups
Tech Communities | Advocacy | Membership | Vendor Marketing