I would lean towards licensing of included libraries like xt9.
On 12/26/2013 06:35 PM, Tone Kastlunger wrote:
Current closed source might have other reasons rather than salary;
- competitive advantage?
- API completeness?
etc
main point should be discussion on clarification on how, if and when
these closed sources will be made available.
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 11:25 PM, a.gra...@gmail.com
<mailto:a.gra...@gmail.com> <a.gra...@gmail.com
<mailto:a.gra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The two things are not related at all :)
Even "Linux", that is 100% opensource, has hundred of people paid
to contribute to it full time.
I know that the comparison is a bit unfair, but it's just to
explain that it can be normal to be paid to develop something that
is opensource.
Can Jolla afford to rely completely on the community? They can't,
at this stage. They pay employees to develop some apps. This
doesn't mean these apps can't be opensourced for this reason. So
probably there is a different reason that only Jolla can explain.
Cheers.
On 25 December 2013 22:17, Andrey Kozhevnikov
<coderusin...@gmail.com <mailto:coderusin...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I think there are persons in Jolla who receive a salary for
developing
because of that Jolla Core is not opensource (yet?)
On 26.12.2013 03:05, Vincent B. wrote:
I'm not sure about it, since I'm unable to find the
sources for Jolla
core apps such as the app clock. I'd like to add the
ability to select a
timer's duration at the second precision level.
Thanks in advance,
Vincent
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
--
Andrea Grandi - Software Engineer / Qt Ambassador / Nokia
Developer Champion
website: http://www.andreagrandi.it
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
