> De�: "Horst Herb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I think _open health_ projects should be based on voluntary work, provided by
> professionals for professionals. Peer help. Community spirit. Cochrane has
> unfortunately degraded to a commercialized thing. I don't think they are a
> good role model for us. In fact, I am not interested in participating in
> anything heading the same way as Cochrane.
I agree totaly. We are on this list for open and free projects. It means
that we will spend our time for only this kind of projects. I could work for
money because it's my job but I will not participate to an open project
which is not free totally.
> I have nothing against vendors providing "add on" services, my pouint of view
> is that the _basic_ thing (uncrippled, of course) must be freely available,
> fully disclosed, open sourced.
gnu like :-)
I think it is THE point. Else we will just be another commercial
alternative. We were talking for standard: what about them if we could give
standard OPEN for all other software. Free should be the standard and
vendors should give us more than the software (assisatnce, packaging,
optimized the code...)
--
az
