From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Subject: Re: SIGAda Workshop
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:03:46 +0200
Date: 2005-09-01T14:03:00+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4316edf4$0$24145$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1125552455.845757.58370@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
rleif wrote:
> I tried to post this once; but I could not find it on Comp.Lang.Ada
>
> I am chairing a workshop/BOF on Commercializing Ada at SIGAda 2005 on
> Wednesday November 16. Since, I have the biased opinion that
> progressive software is a better means of promoting the use of Ada than
> free software (GNU), I wish to invite anyone who believes that free
> software is a better approach to present his or her views. The major
> differences between free and Progressive software is that under the
> latter, the developers get royalties on their work and the purchasers
> are free to do what they want provided it does not impair the
> developers' royalties.
IIRC, Dr. Carlise has announced integration of A# with MS Visual
Studio tools. So how does this fit the free-Progressive
distinction?
Just having read about "The Classification Struggle", and about
the power that comes from defining things, let me ask for a view
that - subject to falsification - dissects the values "GNU" and
"Progressive", and places the pieces that make up these notions
on at least three rather othogonal axes, by way of correlation:
payment, rights to use, and political attitude of the decision
maker.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-01 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-01 5:27 SIGAda Workshop rleif
2005-09-01 7:11 ` tmoran
2005-09-01 12:03 ` Georg Bauhaus [this message]
2005-09-01 12:30 ` rleif
2005-09-01 15:36 ` Pascal Obry
2005-09-04 21:55 ` Rob Veenker
2005-09-05 6:13 ` Pascal Obry
2005-09-07 18:42 ` Rob Veenker
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox