Desktop platforms Toolkit
Story: Sun 'distorts' definition of free software
Posted by: Doe (Saturday 2 July 2005, 8:55 PM)
Well said cb2.
Those who use the software might say the most important thing is ....
But realistically, they shouldn't be part of the equation. It is the actual writers of the software who has the most weight. The question is why did _they_ pick such and such license among all the others? For the majority the most important thing about FOSS isn't that it is free. The ratio of GPL to other licensed projects proves it.
I think Sun is the LAST company we should go to when discussing FOSS. Sun has balanced on the fence and double talked so much, I no longer consider them dependable in any situation that includes this topic.
Full Talkback thread
Story: Sun 'distorts' definition of free software
-
Pundit Rule #001: No Wookies
http://www.channeling... Will Parker -
Sun's president Jonathan Schwartz's comments about... Erik Poupaert
-
What many in the FOSS-community fails to understan... Erik Wikström
-
Erik Wikström:
"Beauty is in the eye of the... Abe -
I'm afraid, when it comes to understandi... Woodrow Windischman -
to Wikström & Windischman: you may be right, but y... cb2
-
Well said cb2.
Those who use the software mig... Doe -
I wrote my comment in the context of the... Woodrow Windischman
-
There's another aspect of Open that seems to be ov... Arthur B.
-
Asking the users about the details of the lic... Andrew Meredith
