Mastodawn

Jun 21, 2023

@LibreTexts when you say "#open" what do you mean? Because you keep using that word...

I'd appreciate seeing your definition.

LibreTexts Jun 23, 2023

@lightweight thanks for asking. We use #open to primarily mean the 5R's codified via #CreativeCommons and #GNU licensing. We do have some content that doesn't follow this (e.g. content w/ an ND clause); in these cases #open
means #OpenAccess. Everything created on the #LibreTexts site is #OER open.

For code, we refer primarily to GNU and MIT licensed open-source content.

We hope this helps answer your question. Let us know if we can clarify anything else related to our greater #LibreVerse.

Jun 23, 2023

@LibreTexts the words #open and #libre are used in the software context to refer to code that is available under an OSI approved open source license, & libre more specifically refers to a #Copyleft (shared-alike) license. Is any of your software open source or Copyleft licensed? What about your flagship software?

I looked on your website and couldn't find any evidence of any open source code to download. Everything I found appeared to be proprietary, i.e. not at all '#open'.

LibreTexts Jun 24, 2023

@lightweight we understand the software community has specific understandings of the terms #open and libre but our focus is more geared toward developing and distributing #OER than developing and distributing the tech around it. That said, all our tech, with the exception of the libraries which are proprietary by NICE CXOne, is open source and can be download via github: https://github.com/LibreTexts

LibreTexts

LibreTexts has 53 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.

GitHub

Jun 24, 2023

@LibreTexts I couldn't find any reference to your open source code on your website... did I miss it? Also, why (especially with your chosen brand) wouldn't you make *all* your software open source? Unless someone can replicate your entire stack independently, it might as well *all* be proprietary. Creating #OER that requires your proprietary software seems very much against the spirit of the #open & #libre you trumpet everywhere. From my perspective, it seems your organisation is #openwashing.

It might be time for a broad (and thoughtful) conversation on the limits of openness, in the #OpenEcosystem? How do #OpenGovernment and #OpenData work within the #FreeSoftware framework? Do #OERs run the risk of promoting #fauxpen and #OpenWashing?

@lightweight @LibreTexts

@enkerli As you can imagine, I'd certainly be keen to have that broader discussion.

@enkerli the almost compete erosion of value in the term "open source" (to mean 'weak open source licenses but, unlike its original meaning, *not* including #Copyleft or '#libre' licenses) thanks to bad corporate actors has forced the #FreeSoftware community to reinforce its long-time use of the term #libre to refer to share-alike #open licensing. #LibreWashing is an emerging insidious problem.

@LibreTexts

@lightweight It might be useful to focus on the phenomena themselves. Yes, including #LibreWashing, #Fauxpen, as well as the whole distinction between software freedom and open source development. There are diverse actors taking different postures which may or may not jibe with our values. Dispassionately, we can still describe the “Ecosystem of Open” with diverse initiatives taking root despite counteracting forces.

In other words, #HowMightWe design this ecosystem for the common good?

@enkerli yep. It's worth thinking it through. I've been thinking about this stuff for a couple decades. This might be useful: https://davelane.nz/nethui-insight-open-about-intent

NetHui Insight: Open is about Intent

At the recent NetHui conference in Auckland last week (8-10 July 2015), in a session titled "Why Not Open?" that I helped run with Rachel Prosser (DIA) and Nigel Robertson (Waikato University), I made

Dave Lane

@lightweight Ditto.

What feels different, these days, is the power of #EcosystemThinking. While #OpenEducation and #OpenGovernment and #OpenData were largely inspired by #FreeSoftware, there’s a sense in which the puzzle pieces are finally realigning.

@lightweight Maybe we should plan something small in a few weeks? Bringing diverse actors together for a thoughtful chat, either realtime (with timezone challenges) or asynchronously through an appropriate platform? I’m thinking of a number of people to invite, who are willing to engage in those issues at a “co-design” level. Establishing common ground?

@enkerli I'm sure we'd be interested, and we could provide a range of uncompromised platforms for co-design. We can invite people to our Matrix instance (persistent chat), BigBlueButton (video conference), Discourse (discoverable discussion), NextCloud + OnlyOffice for collaborative document writing, etc. All are, of course, #LibreSoftware.

@lightweight Yep! Apart from OnlyOffice (was mostly thinking about Collabora), they’re all part of the documentation I’m building for my #KnowledgeTransfer, at my current dayjob.
(Blindside Networks' BBB got started at Carleton’s Technology Innovation Management Program, where research on Open/Libre/Free models is core. @openedtech now uses it for its meetings and leverages Matrix for chat.)

@enkerli Nice! For what it's worth, we've decided that OnlyOffice is well ahead of Collabora at this point, but we've got both, so we can adapt quickly if that changes 😀 Cool re BBB - it's great, eh. And re Matrix, that means we can all talk to one another without having to leave the familiar comfort of our chosen Matrix instances 😎 Federation is far more advanced and civilised than the centralised proprietary options. @openedtech

@lightweight @openedtech Good to know about OnlyOffice (our small association for Free Software in Higher Ed will be interested).
And I’ll soon be free to explore more options.

As for federation, my personal reactions tend to be very positive. Yet it’s clear that a lot of it depends on usage patterns and community relations (not to mention “governance models”). My guess is that @evan would agree.