>yeah, well, how come  if qpopper is open source it is hosted by eudora --
>isn't that a paid company?

I can't speak for the motivations of Qualcomm, but it was my impression
that they wanted a POP3 daemon that worked well with Eudora.  So they
probably consider qpopper a loss leader.  But ... I don't really see
how that matters in any case.  Right now, it's open source, and
Qualcomm can't magically _make_ it proprietary and tell everyone who's
currently running it that they have to give them money.  So I don't
really see what the problem is having qpopper being hosted by Qualcomm;
they've got a vested interest in making sure it works.  If we
contribute to it, yes, Qualcomm could take that and make it into a
commercial product ... but someone ELSE could take those changes and
release a free version.  So where exactly is the harm here?

>and also if you type www.qpopper.org it takes
>you to euroda's home page -- not a qpopper home page -- are we just
>perfecting a eudora product so they can turn it into a for fee mta?  we b
>sukkers

Uh, buddy ... news flash here.  That ALREADY HAPPENED.  There's was
"Qpopper LX" (IIRC) a year or two ago.  It was eventually discontinued,
people who bought it were given a refund, and the results were released
as Qpopper 4.  You'd have to ask Qualcomm about what was going on
there; I only watched it externally.

--Ken

Reply via email to