In article <QXTI6.72258$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bassford) wrote:
> Had they said,
> "Thank you for your suggestion," and left it at that I would have had
> no further interest in pursuing reporting my issue with salting -
> instead they, in a round about way, suggested that my "wish list" item
> could be implemented if I paid his company money. This doesn't speak
> well for the Mozilla community at large, which surely is an open
> source community effort based on common feedback, agreement, and an
> idealistic conception of software development rather than individual,
> and capitalistic, "rogue" membership.
Implementing features that others need for money is no "rogue
membership". It is a legitimate way of making money in connection with
open source (and even free software in the FSF sense).
With open source, you have three main ways to get something implemented:
1) Implement it yourself, if you have the skills and time.
2) Pay someone else for implementing it, if you have money.
3) Try to influence other people's priorities without offering them
money and without annoying them too much.
I think it speaks well for Mozilla that there is a known path for option
#2. Of course, if one lacks the skills, the time and the money, #3 is
the only alternative.
--
Henri Sivonen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.clinet.fi/~henris/
