Is .NET open-source truly open-source if namespaces encapsulate core functionality? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

---

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.

Closed 7 years ago.

Improve this question 开发者_开发百科

I have downloaded some Open Source frameworks with the intention of learning and ultimately contributing to them. Many times the framework requires the use of a namespace for which I do not have source code (e.g. Telerik.Web.MVC.UI), which brings me to my question.

Is a framework really open-source when namespaces provide core functionality? I can appreciate getting something for free but can't help question how this can be advertised as "Completely Open Source"? Am I misunderstanding something about namespaces in .NET?

---

It's very common for open source code to rely on closed source components. For example any open source code relying on Microsoft .net relies on very large amounts of closed source code. In turn, any code that targets Windows itself depends on the closed source Windows code.

There's no conceptual difference between your examples and mine above.

---

First of all, what's really bugging you here is the fact that code relies on external libraries. The namespace is only a way of referencing them.

As for your actual question: Well. From the perspective of the programmers: They expose all code they have written. They cannot give rights to code they have only imported. However, the question of how collections of code of different "visibility" behave when they clash is in fact a strongly discussed one, see for example the difference between GPL (free software, everything derived will be free as well) and LGPL (free software, may be used in non-free software). This is a slightly different aspect, and it's also the "other direction" (from library to application)- still, just to say these are important questions.

As for your concrete case; it's probably ok to call it open source, but it might just mean that something being open source alone doesn't make it an interesting piece of source to look at ;)