Lack of open source shown as negative part of D on Dr. Dobbs

[deadalnix]

Le 09/05/2012 13:29, Paulo Pinto a écrit :
> On Wednesday, 9 May 2012 at 10:43:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> Le 09/05/2012 08:12, Paulo Pinto a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Dr. Dobbs has a nice editorial article about the rise of new native
>>> languages and it mentions
>>> D.
>>>
>>> http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/232901652?cid=DDJ_nl_upd_2012-05-08_h&elq=60a2e0ea244a4667b97377cecc50110f
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunely the editor also points out that D is not fully open source,
>>> without specifiying what
>>> exactly is not open source.
>>>
>>> I've already posted a comment about it, stating that there are open
>>> source implementations and the
>>> complete code is available in Github.
>>>
>>> Still not visible, maybe waiting approval.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Paulo
>>
>> DMD's backend isn't open source.
>
> I know that, but DMD is only the reference compiler.
>
> While this is an unfortunate situation, there are other D compilers
> available,
> which are fully open source.
>
> The most important parts of D are the libraries and the compiler
> frontend, and those are open source.
>

I'd that the most important part of FOSS isn't the license but the 
process. And we are not here yet.