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!news2.google.com!proxad.net!freenix!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: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:04:36 +0100 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: <2004100609152216807%david@bottoncom> <1097075228.200924@master.nyc.kbcfp.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 1097082275 85072 212.85.156.195 (6 Oct 2004 17:04:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:04:35 +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: <1097075228.200924@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Oct 2004 17:04:19.0171 (UTC) FILETIME=[84B78330:01C4ABC6] 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:4809 Date: 2004-10-06T18:04:36+01:00 Hyman Rosen wrote: > Marius Amado Alves wrote: > >> Ah, yes, the request, sorry, it's not a proprietary license, it's a >> request. All is well in open source dreamland. (Pink hearts floating >> around.) But wait, you need a request, so open source licensing >> doesn't work, does it? Ah, bugger! > > What exactly is the problem? The problem is that open source licensing is unadjusted to what you really want (which is usually to charge for certain uses of the software) or to a fair rewarding of the authors. And you must resort to subtrefugial, convoluted, parasitic commercial schemes like the "request" or dual licensing. The problem is that open source licenses treat the software like a physical thing. Maybe there is no unsolvable problem really, but it is so clear that the open source licensing is unadjusted and unfair, that now and then I just have to step in and try to shake those irritating pink hearts.