Mathewson wrote:
I understand 'Open Source' to mean that the software, once
I have obtained it - whether by paying money or FREE, can
be altered, improved, messed-up, messed around by me and
redistributed ( usually without charge) without fear of any
legal penalties.
HOWEVER, I'm a small time chap in a small time country in
Eastern Europe . . .
I would like to find out what the "Princes of the Church"
understand by 'Open Source'; because until a consensus is
established as to what 'Open Source' means the present
discussion is probably a bit pointless, with all parties
entrenched in their respective corners baring their fangs.
Since Stallman and Raymond disagree, I don't expect to find conensus
among us little people here. :)
But in terms of contracting with governments which require open source
software, I think that leaves us out even if our part of a solution is
open source since we, like Flash, Director, Toolbook, and xCode
developers, rely on proprietary components to get the job done.
--
Richard Gaskin
Managing Editor, revJournal
_______________________________________________________
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
