Weiqi Gao wrote: > Isn't "freetard" a derogatory term for Free Software advocates invented > by Fake Steve? I remember seeing the term only on that blog. > > Anyway, I don't think of it as a nice word. And for using it, the "This > Ain't Your Dad's Java" podcast deserves their "explicit" label in iTunes. :) > Personally I'd prefer a number of 4-letter words to "freetard"... > As to whether to mention license terms when a product is talked about on > JavaPosse, my personal feeling is that it is not necessary. People can > figure that out by themselves. If you have that extra 900 milliseconds, > use it to talk about what the product does and how it does it. > Hmmm.... I'd have to disagree here. One of the critical bits for me as to whether I follow up on a library/product lead is whether it is open source and whether it otherwise restricts free commercial use in any way, including whether it is GPL'ed. I don't care too much about particulars beyond this -- BSD, Apache License 2.0, etc, even LGPL, are all "free, unrestricted for commercial use" licenses. Stating the actual license used is probably faster than any other way of spelling this out, though.
-- Jess Holle --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
