maintain this
support.
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Street" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Vista-Office -
..worldvista..openvista...opensource... off-topic
eh?
Well, riddle me this.. and I just
use the
> answers to these
> questions will affect the license. If it is open
> source, then I as an
> end-user have the right to know exactly who, what,
> when, where, and how
> items are incorporated into the SUPPORTED codebase.
> WorldVistA does not
> have a financial e
ril 24, 2005 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Vista-Office -
..worldvista..openvista...opensource... off-topic eh?
> Well, riddle me this.. and I just didn't fall off the turnip truck.
>
> Several board members of WorldVista also have a commercial interest in the
> succes
Well, riddle me this.. and I just didn't fall off the turnip truck.
Several board members of WorldVista also have a commercial interest in the
success of VistA, along with a few outside commercial vendors who have the
dough to throw at this immense project.
How many code bases are there now
Perhaps I am wrong... wait... I know... hard to believe :)
BUT
My point about FOIA's "freeness" is that it is free, not open.
That is why people take it modify it and make other products from it.
If it where open...it would foster more development. Several people I
know are interested in Ped
Several people (as in more than one but less than a billion) have
written to me and said that a big reason that they do not participate,
even though they are interested in VistA is the lack of an open license.
In my previous post I mentioned something about wheels... we should be
flying by now...
ardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Vista-Office
- ..worldvista..openvista...opensource... off-topic eh?
The understanding I got was that we wanted to allow companies
to
-maury-
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Kevin Toppenberg
> To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 5:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Vista-Office
> - ..worldvista..ope
open-source
-maury-
- Original Message -
From:
Kevin Toppenberg
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 5:27
PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members]
Vista-Office - ..worldvista..openvista...opensource... off-topic eh?
The understandin
But doesn't that require a license like the LPGL?
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Apr 23, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Kevin Toppenberg wrote:
The understanding I got was that we wanted to allow companies to be
able to develop modules that work with VistA, and have them be
propriatary. Even on
It is called context Mano. maybe it was lost in translation and nuance.
public domain software is different than open source software which is
different than free software. Open Source is thrown around very loosely
these days.
There are a lot of licenses out there, the license is what mat
The understanding I got was that we wanted to allow companies to be able to develop modules that work with VistA, and have them be propriatary. Even on Linux, one can make a commercial program that makes use of open source technology.
Kevin Doctor Bones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I realize, th
I realize, that I am doing nothing but muckraking at the moment...
and, I know that I am NOT by any means a core vista person or
personality. BUT...
I am offended that we call openvista, openvista... it isn't covered by
the GPL or another license that ensures development happens in the open.
13 matches
Mail list logo
