ja, that's my thinking too.
if you can get the source for free its open source.
no matter, if there are additional options like support or extended versions

r.



Carlos Rovira wrote:
> IMHO,
> 
> Many Open Source Projects are supported by companies in a commercial
> manner (i.e, selling services and support related to the software).
> The software is Open Source and you can download the source and the
> binaries (if any), and you could go alone if you have the expertise
> required.
> 
> Some companies that use os software could want support and they'll pay
> for it, and for these reason it's good to have commercial support.
> 
> 
>>    >The free version is not the opensource one.
>>    >yes it is open source, but for $ 300 with complete support. Is
>>   that okay ?
> 
> 
> The problem here is the first line. There's a free version that is not OS???.
> The normal way would be: "The software is OS and you would want
> complete support for $300. (But the last is not necesary)"
> 
> This is the way I see it.
> 
> Best,
> 
> C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2005/11/6, Ralf Bokelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
>>Imho OSFlash should be about open source, not about free tools for
>>everybody. We are developers after all, aren't we?
>>
>>r.
>>
>>
>>Robert Edgar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Aral,
>>>Well I guess open source doesn't mean it cant be commerical and reading your
>>>site you actually seem to state that
>>>
>>>"The primary focus of this site and community is open source, not free or
>>>commercial Flash tools and projects that are not open source."
>>>
>>>Seems to imply that it only matters that it is open source...
>>>
>>>Not saying that it occurred to me before that anything on osflash could be
>>>commercial but just saying after seeing the email and checking the site it
>>>does read like that's acceptable and outside of flash open source commerical
>>>software does exist like JBoss or some version of linux
>>>
>>>Maybe it should be made clear on osflash is only for software that is both
>>>open source AND free.
>>>Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>>Behalf Of Aral Balkan
>>>Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 8:48 PM
>>>To: Open Source Flash Mailing List
>>>Subject: Re: [osflash] xmi2actionscript charging for sourcecode?
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi Patrick,
>>>
>>>Thank-you. I have written to Yehia and will give him a chance to respond
>>>before removing the project from OSFlash.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>   >The free version is not the opensource one.
>>>>   >yes it is open source, but for $ 300 with complete support. Is
>>>>  that okay ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Nope, if this is the case, it's definitely, *not* OK!  (For an OSFlash
>>>project.)
>>>
>>>Aral
>>>
>>>Patrick Mineault wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Here's a copy of the exchange I've had with the developer:
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>how much would you be willing to pay for the way it would fit what you
>>>>need ? <Snip>
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>osflash mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>osflash mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>osflash mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>>
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ::| Carlos Rovira
> ::| http://www.carlosrovira.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org

_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org

Reply via email to