On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 22:25, Jimen Ching wrote:
or Openly Sourced. It would be an equal shame to see OpenSourceAdvocates
fail to take their message to the free market and allow it to compete on its
merits.
Can either you or Warren explain how these legislation prevent Open Source
or Free
On Sun, 2002-10-13 at 11:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with Warren 100% on this one. It is silly to say that open
source would be competing on its own merits if you force everyone to use
it. That's a dictatorship of sorts. Its like saying Sadam Housein is a
great leader because he is
On Sun, 2002-10-13 at 12:44, James A. Stroble wrote:
tied up in proprietary formats. As well, a government must be able to
ascertain the integrity of the data it uses, which again means that it
should have access to the source code of the programs that process that
data. It is not surprising
Wow, these are all excellent points that I didn't even consider when I
sent in my last post. However, it is also true that even without having
the source handy, an organization with enough resources can do stack
traces and network monitoring to make sure no spyware or anything exists
in a
On 12 Oct 2002, Warren Togami wrote:
2) By outright banning proprietary software, we didn't compete based on
merit. Instead we used non-technical means to negate the competition
process. I'd rather win fairly, and people choose our software
sincerely.
Point of advice; if a professor asks you to
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, R. Scott Belford wrote:
Can either you or Warren explain how these legislation prevent Open Source
or Free Software from competing on their merits?
I can't because it doesn't. I can say that efforts on such legislation are
wasted. These efforts would be, as my post
On 13 Oct 2002, Warren Togami wrote:
Microsoft Word .DOC files from government is completely unacceptable,
even though OpenOffice works fine.
Again, the issue is what is the goal of the legislation? Is it to find
the superior wordprocessor that can open a .doc file? Or is the goal to
create
On Sun, 2002-10-13 at 15:45, Jimen Ching wrote:
I am curious. What do you and Warren believe is the goal of these
efforts? It seems like both of your are stuck on this 'compete on merits'
issue. It is hard for me to believe the _government_ cares about such
things. I hope this issue does
On 13 Oct 2002, Eric Hattemer wrote:
However, it is also true that even without having the source handy, an
organization with enough resources can do stack traces and network
monitoring to make sure no spyware or anything exists in a product.
Would this be the best way to approach security? It
Blender is a powerful 3D design and rendering tool, now released as
fully Open Source Software under the GPL license.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/13/1754204mode=threadtid=117
Today, Sunday oct 13, 2002, we've launched the Blender sources as GNU
GPL to the Internet. Blender has become
- Original Message -
From: al plant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: linuxdan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: [luau] Help with Red Hat install of rwCdRom
linuxdan wrote:
Al
Ive checked with my braintrust on this one because I was a little
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/10/13/1636205mode=threadtid=99
Lawrence Lessig has updated his blog giving his thoughts on how the
oral arguments for Eldred vs. Ashcroft went before the Supreme Court on
Wednesday. He discusses the goals and methods he used in framing his
arguments to
- Original Message -
From: Grant Apgar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 7:51 PM
Subject: This is Grant
hey dan,
I can't find a graphical utilite on RedHat 8.0 that allows removal of
3rd
party rpm's. the package manager is only for system
What he wants is apt-get and Synaptic.
http://apt.freshrpms.net
Download apt for Red Hat 8.0. After it is installed, type:
apt-get update (This downloads the list of packages.)
apt-get install synaptic(This installs synaptic.)
Synaptic is a GUI frontend tool for apt
14 matches
Mail list logo
