On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:17:41AM -0800, Frank LaMonica wrote:
> I like the terminology you used: "source included software (SIS)". SIS
> would be much better than a closed source, proprietary alternative, but I
> don't see any incentive for open source programmers to contribute to such a
> program. If a company went out of business or ceased to produce the
> application, SIS would at least provide an option to people so they could
> recover their investment in data which was created by the application.
Hmm, too bad www.sis.com is already sold... but www.sisi.org is still free
for the Source Included Software Initiative... Any volunteers ? ;-)
Gregor
- Re: IPL as a burden Seth David Schoen
- Re: IPL as a burden Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: IPL as a burden Brian Behlendorf
- Re: IPL as a burden Ben Tilly
- Re: IPL as a burden Manfred Schmid
- Re: IPL as a burden Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: IPL as a burden Mark Koek
- Re: IPL as a burden Ralf Schwoebel
- Re: IPL as a burden SamBC
- Re: IPL as a burden Frank LaMonica
- Re: IPL as a burden Gregor Hoffleit
- Re: IPL as a burden kmself
- Re: IPL as a burden Forrest J. Cavalier III
- Re: IPL as a burden Mark Koek
- RE: IPL as a burden Ben Tilly
- Re: IPL as a burden Andrew J Bromage
- Re: IPL as a burden Frank LaMonica
- Re: IPL as a burden Andrew J Bromage
- Re: IPL as a burden Andrew J Bromage
- Re: IPL as a burden SamBC
- Re: IPL as a burden Angelo Schneider

