From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a875d9649dde34e3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!newsfeed.stueberl.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-ham1.dfn.de!news.zfn.uni-bremen.de!informatik.uni-bremen.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GWindows and a future home for it
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 22:45:44 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <cjpveo$n6o$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <es6kl0pddjvs52ch5sd7hp69m8roimj8ih@4ax.com>
 <mailman.134.1096502599.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <4e8fe302b927b504b93983dba6b0d79f@localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com>
 <cjk6e6$t7h$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <mailman.148.1096656054.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1096843544 23768 134.91.1.34 (3 Oct 2004
 22:45:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 22:45:44 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4631
Date: 2004-10-03T22:45:44+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marius Amado Alves <amado.alves@netcabo.pt> wrote:
:> And then, GPL and commercial or not are two dimensions.
: 
: I wish people would stop saying this as if it were feasible to sell open 
: source software.

I didn't say that you could sell Free Software, only that licensed
source code and commercial source code are two different aspects.
Still, GPLed software plays its part in commercial
software enterprises. Other open source licenses do and did work
in commercial software enterprises. It just takes either reason,
or enough laywers, to explain to customers that source code /=
"gift", unless the contract says so.

If people continue to say that delivering source code cannot be
done when payment is wanted, it becomes a kind of self-fulfilling
prophesy, I think.

I find it important to spread the news (huh!) that
producing software is work; people are familiar with the idea of
paying craftspeople; software producers aren't too different from
craftspeople; so, pay them. Some companies do know this, so when
they need X they pay other companies' developers who produce X,
using an open source license.

Not everyone is an opportunistic free rider.

It may still take some time to realize that open source software needs
maintenance.  But without this learning experience (and failures,
for sure, that happens during learing) nothing changes.
If you hide the process, it cannot be seen, therefore it cannot
be understood.

-- Georg