Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:34:59 -0800
   From: Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   I can't see any circumstances where any of Dan's sofware can be deemed
   closed source. 

It is not the case that all software is either open source or closed
source.  There is a broad continuum of licensing possibilities.

I already mentioned an important freedom which Dan does not permit.
The lack of that freedom means that Dan's software is not open source.
Saying that Dan's software is not open source does not mean that it is
closed source.  Dan's software is almost open source, it just isn't
quite all the way there.

Ian

Reply via email to