On Tuesday 07 November 2006 21:26, John Mackenzie wrote: > >Anybody forcing me to ring them up for a new "license number" when I want > > to update a minor version of so called "free" software has got a big > > problem. > > Argus is taking off in my Division - specialists and GPs installing. > This is a good thing.
In our Division too - the list of GPs and specialists on it is already impressive - especially since the AHS pulled the finger out and got onto it too (now we can communicate with the base hospital, what a radically new concept!) > Argus isn't perfect yet Horst, but they're trying hard and I'm sure > will listen to your feed back. Give 'em a call. Already did the first time the program requested a "registration code". What an absolute PITA. Complained bitterly on the phone but git the impression they hadn't got the faintest clue what I was harping about. I will not have any software on *my* computers that restricts my freedom, and forced dependence on some obscure "registration codes" is where the buck stops for me. Even if you get the code for free just by phoning. It is really silly - of course one can fetch the source code, look up the offending bit, and remove the "registration code" requirement. But it is a hassle, bound to cause hassle again and again whenever a new version comes out (thinking of it - source code and current version aren't in sync anyway, aren't they?) I deeply resent the situation. A project was seeded with public money. It was meant to become "free". Currently it is "sort of freeish". Not acceptable. They have to get their act together - either put their cards onto the table and become upfront proprietary software, maybe "available at no cost to the end user under certain circumstances, with some of the source code available depending on version", or they become true open source software where there is simply zero tolerance for such bizarre restrictions such as mandatory show stopping "registration codes" In their current stage I feel that I have been taken for a ride, that me and so many others spent time and energy advocating what we never would support if we would have guessed what it would become. I would be happy if we get a source repository that reflects the current release, where the software installs from repository following instructions within the same repository, with no support whatsoever (unless one pays for it). Then they can release in parallel as many closed or semi-closed versions, time bombed, "registration code" restricted, whatever, as they like, packaged for as easy or as difficult installs as they deem necessary Horst _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
