Subject: Re: problems with open source
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: 24 Mar 1999 15:33:29 -0000

 24 Mar 1999 15:33:29 -0000
Stig Hackvšn writes:
 > bruce was suggesting that if you develope something new and you're considering
 > a source license, then that's bad unless it's open source because people who
 > need source won't have to choose "build" instead of "buy"...
 > 
 > if i (the hypothetical I) have something that i want to sell, then i want to
 > discourage others from building a replacement for my product.

Sure, but IMHO, the set of characteristics required by the OSD
(http://opensource.org/osd.html) brings with it certain benefits that
cannot otherwise be had.  So what Bruce is saying is that there are
enough benefits to some nearly-free software (for example, McVoy's
BitKeeper) which outweigh the benefits of truly-free (OSD compliant)
software.

Most of us are working on Open Source software because we see a
benefit to doing so (I don't count RMS in this category, and maybe not
Bruce either :).  I don't see it as a problem if we have to weigh one
set of benefits against another.

-- 
-russ nelson <rn-sig@crynwr.com>  http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok |   There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice |   that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |   cause of world peace.