On 7/15/06, manny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Souce available" doesn't necessarily mean that the source caa be modified and that the resulting compiled binary can be redeployed. Therefore, "source available" software does not necessarily "do the job" as well as open source software. It lacks one of the very features that makes open source software a powerful tool.
Okay, now I get it. But then again, it's a catch 22 -- if the software that does the job is not under any open source license, and the government will require all software to be used/acquired to be under an open source license, what will be done? This is precisly why I think making a bill that will require government to use only open source software is a big hindrance to _measurable_ productivity and progress. I still believe that the Philippine government cannot afford to be choosy of the solutions that work, since we still have problems with delivering basic services to the constituency. If it comes from Microsoft and costs lots of money but works and does the job, then why should we stop that solution from being used because of a _philosophical difference_? Don't get me wrong, I love open source software, and develop open source software myself. But the thing is, I don't think _our_ government should favor it or require it be the only type of software to be used. -- Dean Michael C. Berris C/C++ Software Architect Orange and Bronze Software Labs http://3w-agility.blogspot.com/ http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com/ Mobile: +639287291459 Email: dean [at] orangeandbronze [dot] com _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
