Alex Hudson <[email protected]> writes: > I think there's a difference between software developed commercially > and commercial software - just because people are paid to write it > isn't the crucial difference for me. Indeed, even if people got > compensation of some sort, I wouldn't necessarily call it commercial: > soliciting donations, for example, doesn't make software commercial > for me, even if it pulls in a considerate amount each month. > > I would struggle to label most free software as commercial on that > basis. RHEL would be an example I suppose, but I wouldn't call Ubuntu > commercial.
So much for examples of things you exclude from “commercial software”. (Many of which I disagree with.) What, then, is your definition of that term so we know what you *would* apply it to? -- \ “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a | `\ finite world is either a madman or an economist.” —Kenneth | _o__) Boulding | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
