Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 03:11:43PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote:
> > Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Not to mention that the whole point of freeware and open source
> > > software in general is to give everyone the ability to audit the
> > > software, not just a select few.
> >
> > Dan's software isn't open source. [...]
>
> I said, "freeware and open source software". Do you always selectively
> ignore part of what someone says to make your point?
I ignored it because I wasn't sure what you meant, and it wouldn't
matter much anyway.
If by "freeware" you meant "Free Software" in the GNU sense, then
Dan's software isn't that either, and I'd say Free Software isn't
about auditability so much as customizability.
If by "freeware" you meant "software that is available for zero
price", then that doesn't imply the source is available, so there's
obviously no inherent tie to easier auditability there.
If by "freeware" you meant software that is distributed for free with
source, then Dan's qualifies, but to say that auditability is the goal
of *all* such software is a terribly strong statement, and as I said,
I'm not aware of Dan ever stating that this was even *one* of *his*
goals, let alone "the whole point".
paul
