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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable 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!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.agarik.com!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Amado Alves Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GWindows and a future home for it Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 14:01:56 +0100 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: <4e8fe302b927b504b93983dba6b0d79f@localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1096894934 70368 212.85.156.195 (4 Oct 2004 13:02:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 13:02:14 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Oct 2004 13:01:49.0635 (UTC) FILETIME=[4FB10130:01C4AA12] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4658 Date: 2004-10-04T14:01:56+01:00 Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Marius Amado Alves 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. Two dimensions, different aspects, these words imply that you can have any combination of {open, close} * {free, charged} (one of them being the unfeasible open and charged, unfeasible because the minute you open it, someone will put a copy for free on the Internet, bye bye business). > 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. No, by the contrary, once they understand exactly open source licenses, changes increase they'll look for a "free ride" first. > 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. No, the problem is rooted at open source treatment of code like a physical object. > 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. Absolutely. This is the spirit of the SDC alternative. > Some companies do know this, so when > they need X they pay other companies' developers who produce X, > using an open source license. Seldom. > Not everyone is an opportunistic free rider. Everyone wants to cut down expenditures. > It may still take some time to realize that open source software needs > maintenance. No, people are not unaware of that, they simply can get it for free. Right now the connection to Ada is thin, so please continue discussion in the SDC forum or privately.