------------------------------------------------ On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:11:37 -0600, Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kurt Starsinic writes: > > > Should Perl do the same? > > > > Absolutely not. Perl supports defunct operating systems, buggy > > operating systems, commercial operating systems, and poorly marketed > > operating systems. It would be inappropropriate to drop SCO just > > because it happens to be all of the above. > > Hear, hear. Perl exists to *help* people trapped on crappy systems. > If we can find it in our conscience to support Microsoft Monopoly^W > Windows, then we can support SCO's software. > This could brew an interesting discussion or just start a flame war, but what happens tomorrrow when SCO *claims* that they have IP protected code in Perl and that every Perl distribution is tainted and all users must pay license fees to use it? SCO has proven that it is no longer sufficient for an open source product to just exist and have a license, is there sufficient documentation about where *all* code in a product has come from and whether it was "clean" to begin with? http://danconia.org
