2009/11/15 steve paesani <[email protected]>: >> If nobody pays development, no development takes place. > True, free software is, by fact, a myth. Lest developers have starved to > death > after 7 or so days of programming GPL licensed code they were sustained, > somehow, by others which invariably equates to getting paid. > The organised and suastained suport however form much of the software > written > in this manner can be said by some if not may to be lacking.
You seem to have misunderstood the meaning of the words "free software". Free software has nothing to do with the price that anyone pays, it has *only* to do with the absence of rude restrictions on what people can do with it. I think you mean to say that quite a bit of free software development is funded. This makes the software no less free (it has, in many cases, made it /more/ free). Using the term to refer to software that is given away or written by someone who is not getting paid dilutes the term (and confuses people in the free software community). It's an unfortunate ambiguity in the English language, but one that has consistent resolution in the software licensing world. William Leslie
