Hi all,
everyone knows that I was against the SMSQ/E license from the get-go...
However after receiving TT's opinion on the matter (which is best so we now know 
where all interested parties stand at), I have to say that although I retain some 
minor reservations on the matter, I now stand behind his opinion and therefore I do 
support the SMSQ/E license as it stands.

If someone has copies of the list in-or-around '98 he will remember that I had a 
huge discussion with Roy where we "agreed on dissagreeing" on what open software 
is all about and why it should be supported, I did use at that time the same analogy 
Tony Tebby used (the author and the book) now...

In essence my objections up to now were to the fee if SMSQ/E was perceived as a 
product. It was an ommission on my part not to see it as a "special
" work of art which is enduring... After the artist is done with it he releases it to 
the 
public but still retains rights to it... he didn't have to do it but he did it 
nonetheless 
so... yeah pay a fee, why the hell not? :-)

It's a shame really I was looking at the tree and I was missing the forest... (I was 
blind but now I see *Heavenly music sounds in the background*

:-)

Phoebus 


  • ... John Sadler
    • ... Peter Graf
    • ... Richard Zidlicky
    • ... Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος
      • ... Dave P
        • ... ZN
        • ... Roy Wood
          • ... Malcolm Cadman
            • ... Wolfgang Lenerz
              • ... Malcolm Cadman
        • ... Wolfgang Lenerz
    • ... Phoebus Dokos

Reply via email to