Remastering DSL or Borrowing Code

Recently I was forwarded an email asking if it is okay for a group to do a remaster of DSL. For the record, we are okay with anyone doing a remaster and distributing it. There have been plenty, and I personally take it as a complement. The same goes for other light distributions which barrow ideas, that's really flattery in my opinion.

Yet, when a project uses code, which is nearly verbatim taken out of our project and then pretends like it is unique work it absolutely drives me nuts. Once, we had a guy take a shell script written by Robert which was then just encased in a perl wrapper. The script was nearly identical, yet was put out as original work. In my opinion, that's just low class.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Standing on the Shoulders

The open source movement has the advantage of sharing ideas and code to make better software, faster and more reliable then closed source.

Removing the orginal author's name and credits or worse substituting your own name as the author is not only unethical, but it breaks the GPL license.

Damnsmall Linux (DSL) is not just a remaster of Knoppix. There is lot of original code to make what DSL is today. Yet, there is some that wholesale copy it and give no credit to the original author(s) or the Damnsmall project.

This stifles advancement. Whereas a monolopy is bad this sort of behaviour is equally as bad and should be boycotted as well.