On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Brian Russo <br...@beruna.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Miguel Montesinos > <mmontesi...@prodevelop.es> wrote: >> >> 1) Do you think that it may avoid proprietary users to migrate to open >> solutions, as they can benefit of open-source libraries under their >> proprietary software? > > It's overwhelmingly a good thing. > > If people are using proprietary software that incorporates open source > libraries.. then they are using both open source AND proprietary > software components. "100% open source" purists (in my opinion) > alienate themselves from a large portion of the community. > There are > many practical reasons to use proprietary software, I don't see it as > something that ever gets 100% eliminated (in an realistic timeline > relevant to me).
This is a very good point, I fully agree with it. IMHO the success of FOSS4G can be measures not (only) by the number of closed/commercial deployments we can try to replace but rather by the number of closed source software/companies relying on it. GDAL docet. Ciao, Simone. > >> Besides, this give arguments to proprietary >> manufacturers because of the weakness of open-source software needing to >> run on top of proprietary ones, or to sell out their compatibility with >> FOSS4G. > > No more than an argument that proprietary software is weak for > 'needing' to leverage open source. And how is selling compatibility > with FOSS4G bad? Isn't that the goal? > > > > -- > Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
