Hi, I am from Berlin and making research about open source hardware and would like to organize the following workshop for the OSCEDays in Berlin. Don't hesitate to comment on this proposition. I'm still working on it.
There is a precise definition of what open source means. Also the term open source hardware has been coined quite precisely. But interestingly, not every project claiming to be open source fits in these defintions. Having a closer look to current practices, there acually seems to be a certain discrepancy between theory and practice, intention and reality.
So what makes that a product can be qualified as open source? If the concept of openness is no binary concept but more like a continuum between "completely open" and "completely closed", where is the limit between open and closed ? If I develop a product and intend to publish the CAD files but didn't find the time to do it, do I have the right to call my product open source? Can be the opennes defined upon the quantity of information that is shared or more upon the quantity of people actively working on it, forking it or replicating it?
Objectives of the workshop:
* reflect on the concept of open source and on best practices of open source hardware
* working on the definition of an openess index for product (development projects)
* raise awareness on the meaning of open source
The challenge will take place in Berlin.