[milters] Archive

Lists Index Date Thread Search

Article: 35
From: Jamie Jones
Date: 2004-09-15 10:51:47 -0400
Subject: Re: Business model?

Removal...........: milters-request@milter.info?subject=remove
More information..: http://www.milter.info/#Support
--------------------------------------------------------

> You say that, but you're obviously a user of Anthony's stuff, and it 
> has *never* been an Open Source product, not even close.
>
> So obviously, there's some wiggle-room in what people are willing to 
> accept, right? Unless you just assumed that since you had access to the 
> source code it was open source  (not true).

Exactly.

Whilst I'm an open-source user, advocate, and enthusiast, I think I'm
a bit more of a realist about things (but then, I'm in the FreeBSD
camp, not the quasi-religious GNU / Linux camp :)  Don't flame me
more reasonable GNU/Linux users !!! )

I've even heard people don't like OPENSSL because it isn't GNU (!),
even though its license is "more free"

I see no reason why things "have" to be open source, and whatever
license Anthony chooses is his choice, and fine by me, and if he
can earn money from selling the product, not just the service, then
great!

I've bought 2 things for my home system: Opera web browser, and the
OSS sound drivers (which are now free anyway)... I realise they
wanted to protect their code, but I'd have much preferrerd the
source distribution to compile natively, so that I would'nt have
library problems, and would be able to optimise the compile for
the athlon xp+

So, I hope Anthonys software is available in source form, though
I realise that somewhere down the line, this option may be no longer
possible.

Lists Index Date Thread Search