On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 10:10:36AM -0300, Andr?s Delfino wrote:
> As I have said before, BSD was the unique Unix-like operative system
> with a ISC-style license. That's why, IMHO, companies invested in it.
they supported it because they used it for their own product.
so what has changed in 'em now?
they use it but they do not support it. they make you and me simple
folks and small companies to pay our money to make software for 'em.
and we continue doing so for at least stuff we get to use for
living has decent shit in it.
cu
> On 3/24/06, Damien Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Andris Delfino wrote:
> >
> > > Please, stop wanting companies to support you. It doesn't work that
> > > way. To develop an OS under a licence like the ISC has a big hole:
> > > funding. You can't just go: Hey, you use the implementation that I
> > > develop and give away for free, you should pay me!. If the pay you,
> > > OK, if the don't, well, that's OK too, and more realistic.
> >
> > Even if we were to accept your pessimistic worldview that organisational
> > gratitude is only a myth, then it is still in companies who use
> > OpenBSD or OpenSSH interest to contribute - funding committed and
> > internally-motivated developers to improve components of your product
> > is far less expensive than recruiting, training, paying and providing
> > office space for semi-motivated staff who crank out code of varying
> > quality for financial reward alone.
> >
> > BTW, your linkage between the license and a lack of funding is
> > specious, and there exist plenty of counter examples - including BSD
> > itself.
> >
> > -d
>
--
paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
