On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:31, Phoebus Dokos wrote: > Hey I have no problem with providing support on this but I don't see how > many "sales" SMSQ/E would have in the US (apart from the few upgrades). > That would be just a convenience service to the community rather than a > "business" :-) That is very probable. Wolfgang
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Wolfgang Lenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Dexter
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Roy Wood
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Dexter
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criti... Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Richard Zidlicky
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Phoebus Dokos
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Dexter
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Marcel Kilgus
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license c... Dexter
