On Tuesday 24 July 2001 07:09 pm, you wrote: > Shareware! That may be a better title. It will be open source > shareware...??? The reason I suggest 'shareware' is because the license is so restrictive it may as well be shareware. > I know, Ill call it "not open source", and I'll distribute the code! Just because we can look at the source code doesn't make it Open Source. _______________________________________________ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
- [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS toad
- [freenet-chat] RE: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Josh
- Re: [freenet-chat] RE: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Rob Cakebread
- [freenet-chat] RE: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Josh
- Re: [freenet-chat] RE: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Rob Cakebread
- Re: [freenet-chat] RE: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Timm Murray
- [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Timm Murray
- [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Timm Murray
- [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Timm Murray
- [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] MercuryFS Timm Murray