I am definitely a believer in open source, open standards, and everything that goes with it. I have been a proponent and evangelist for this for a long time. And I think we all want software to be free, as in open, like GPL etc.
But the reality of the world is that much software is not free, much is proprietary. The problem I have with what you are saying, it that you think you have a right to have all free/open software. I don't think you have that right. You can make choices, and choose not to use or support proprietary software, but to say it is descrimination to not have open source, I think that is stretching the definition of discrimination.
I thought descrimination meant not being treated differently, but being treated equally with others. If that is true, you are saying you want more than others. Others don't have all free software. They cannot force anyone to make their software open source.
The open source model has proven to be very powerful indeed. But proprietary software is a reality, and it isn't going away.
Have you checked any of your own software into open source today, so others can use it? If you had an idea that you wanted to keep proprietary, in order to preserve your intellectual property, don't you think you have the right to do that? Don't others? How does "equality" equal "open source"? Open source may create equality, but if tomorrow it was forced that all software be open and free, there would be a lot of empty buildings and unemployed developers.
I am ALL for open source. But I believe in choice and freedom. If I believe in choice then I cannot say someone "should" open their source, just because I want their code.
-- Doug
At 10:10 AM 7/18/2003 +0200, you wrote:
I'm agree to explain why I think that ... : On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:42:31AM +0200, Doug wrote: > Osvaldo said: > > equival to discriminating people > Sounds like a stretch of the definition to me. Well, does any alternatives already exist, or any other equivalent product? if the answer is: - yes it exists but not for Linux, then I consider that this discriminates me since I only use Linux as os, (and I'm probably not the one and only to do that) - if the answer is no, anyway no alternatives for Linux, then it means the product must be ported, and to port it the community need the code: not giving the code is an empeachment of development of solutions for us, so it reduces my accessibility, it requires that I should continue using a o s taht supports that product, so I feel it as an encouragement for proprietary solutions and a discrimination to people who prefers another choice.
> Discriminating: to make a difference in treatment or Thats jsut what I explained. > favor on a basis other than individual merit > <discriminate in favor of your friends> > <discriminate against a certain nationality> This is a strechted vision of the subject I think so.
Osvaldo. PS: accepting to gie the code prevents people to hack (sorry to crack) for obtaining the same thing... think about it!!!
_______________________________________________ Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
_______________________________________________ Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list