On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Johan Vromans <jvrom...@squirrel.nl> wrote: > Huub Peters <i...@huubpeters.com> writes: > >> That kinda takes my enthusiasm down a notch although I fully >> understand why you would be charging for support. > > Yes, I can understand as well. But my wxPerl applications are free so it > feels awkward (and certainly not motivating) that I'd have to pay a > subscription fee to allow other people to use my free applications. > Moreover, this means that Cava is now a closed source application and I > try to avoid closed source apps as much as possible.
I have similar feeling here and I'd not want to pay for software I use to distribute open source software but on the other hand I try to be pragmatic. I might pay for some other services - e.g. web site design - so I feel less troubled paying for missing software. In my other hat at PEG I'd also like to encourage people to make money using Perl even if that means closed source applications. I wonder if keeping Cava open source (and I did not even know it ever was open source) would really interfere with the idea of selling it as subscription based service. That's up to Mark to decide. > Distributing wxPerl applications to nonexpert users is still a pain. > This may be one of the reasons there are so few good wxPerl > applications. A free, good packager would be helpful. > > Yes, I guess I could apply for the 'discretionary none charged > subscription' but that doesn't really change my point. I have missed that option when I looked at the web site a few hours ago and I was wondering if it was possible to provide a blanket free (as in free beer) license for packaging open source applications? If I understand it, for now it works on a per request base. I think I'll give a try to Cava to see if I can use it to package Padre for the various platforms. I believe it would widen the install base of Padre by a lot if we had simple installers for the major platforms. regards Gabor
