Subject: Re: problems with open source
From:Stig Hackvšn <stig@hackvan.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:03:37 -0800

> > 4) Users contribute changes, putting pressure on us to add not only
> > features people request, but also features that they have contributed
> > code for, even if I don't have the rights to use that code (i.e. we
> > have to redo it from scratch, see #3).
> 
> That you can solve with a license change.
> 
> I think you should consider that not all software needs to be Open Source.
> Make some proprietary software to provide your livelyhood. Open up what you
> can. I am afraid that the more restrictive licenses may actually do more
> damage to our community than straight proprietary software, because half-free
> software acts to discourage people from making an entirely free solution, and
> leads the free software community down the slippery slope of accepting
> progressively more restrictive licenses.

from a business perspective, bruce, discouraging a free replacement with a
half-free alternative makes a lot of sense.  you're all on the free side of
the fence...i think that sitting on the fence is a perfectly valid place to be.

if there are practical advantages to source code availability, then it would
be stupid not to offer them to customers of commercial software.

i hate proprietary software because there's too much lock-in and it's
impossible to fix.  i don't see why you keep discouraging hybrid approaches.

> 
> Free-it-over-time strategies, which are used by Alladin Ghostcscript
> and others, seem to discourage collaboration. A recently suggested variation
> attempts to foster collaboration by paying for modifications, but its details
> seem very cumbersome.
> 

what's this one?  the non-consultants' license?

	stig

-- 
Stig        ...  Friend of Hacking      ...  707-987-3236 work@home
Hackvšn      ...  http://hackvan.com     ...  415-264-8754 mobile
We are (b)Org ...  http://brainofstig.AI  ...  stig@hackvan.com

Feed on "Brain of Stig" --- http://brainofstig.AI/subscribe/