> I understand your northern European engineering thought process.
> However, in this case, there might be a simple solution that addresses
> both issues (eng. and biz), I'm holding a "stone" in attempt to ...
> :)
> Essentially keep things where they are (default), then, add a
> config/flag option for ds password encryption, if clicked/selection of
> "NO" pops up the business side reliability, security, barlar, barlar...
>
> Then, everybody is happy. And it shouldn't be ton of work.
> This approach could be applied to quite a few situations.
>
> Don
>
> > > Jochem van Dieten wrote:
> >
> > I hope they value my opinion, but I don't think anything will change
>
> > even if they do.
> >
> > The decision whether or not to open-source something is very
> > straightforward from an engineering point of view. It doesn't change
>
> > the functionality of the code, all what happens is that the code can
>
> > be studied by others. If you have a reasonable belief this studying
>
> > does not introduce security risks, there really isn't much reason
> not
> > to release sourcecode.
> > From a business point of view, things are very different. There you
>
> > have issues such as the depreciation of IP, competitors, liability,
>
> > providing support on the code instead of the application etc. Those
>
> > are the things that stop corporations from open sourcing their
> > software, and me repeating what everybody knows already about open
> > source does not change any of those arguments.
> >
> > Jochem
> >
> > PS Both decompiling and decrypting for the sole purpose of studying
>
> > the code in order to interface with it is explicitly allowed under
> > Dutch law, even if the licence terms of the software say otherwise:
> > http://wetten.overheid.
nl/cgi-bin/deeplink/law1/title=Auteurswet%201912/article=45m
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
