On 5/20/08, Kurt H Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Kirschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why do you think a user who gets DWM in a binary on some device knows a) > > that this is DWM and b) knows that DWM is licensed under MIT? So this > > user does not have the freedom to use, study, share and improve the > > software. > > > You think their ability to hack on dwm is destroyed by the fact that > they can't identify it as dwm? > > I don't see how this follows. Googling "tiling window manager" turns > up a ton of results, most of which are descended from dwm. > > > -- > > # Kurt H Maier > >
Perfectly right. Even such closed source adds up, but does not destroys the original software. It even gives a bigger choice to the user. More freedom in this sense.
