> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 09:42 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote: >> In all of this discussion about whether they are third-party >> developers or independant software developers, I think people have >> missed the important point. >> >> That point is that we need to encourage traditional independant >> software VENDORS to our platform. Our platform is placed in such a >> way that vendors writing closed-source applications can use our >> platform without licensing costs (unlike QT). > > I think _you_ missed the important point: It's the other way around. > > They _need_ a decent platform. > > We don't need them. > > We don't need Adobe Acrobat. We don't need Adobe Photoshop. > We don't need Microsoft Office and other parafernalia. > We don't need DB2, Informix, etc... > > Rather it's the other way around...
Many of our _users_ need for those systems to work well with free software. Yes, they need free-software alternatives even more, but we don't need to kick them repeatedly in the balls while they are trying to make the transition. GNOME is _the_ platform for all, not just for a small group of obsessives. Our platform is LGPL, not GPL. Push for a crazy relicensing referendum or something if you don't like GNOME's aims. Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
