--- "Spruell, Darren-Perot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Better approach. How about said companies belly up and support the group > that enables them (in part) to enjoy the financial success they have?
Because there is no reason for them to. Here's what would happen: 1) license change comes out 2) IT looks for alternative program 3) IT provides figures to finance for either the alternative program, the new license, or in house development 4) finance runs some cash flow analysis and sits down with the CIO and CFO based on the results 5) suggestion is provided to management I work in finance. There is no reason to provide funding from a business standpoint. What does the business gain? Corporations basically have a free development team. Sure they cannot dictate requests, but the code quality is high and the product works well. Honestly, unless the openSSH team mandates funding, no one will cough up cash. And the license price has to be the sweet spot, where it isn't too high that no funding is received and not too low that it doesn't accomplish anything. And Theo from his messages doesn't want the direction of the program dictated to him by folks that donate. No corporation is gonna provide funding unless they get something out of it. I think Theo needs to put his foot down on this issue. I would think of openSSH as separate from openBSD. I would not advocate changing licenses on the rest of openBSD. Of course, the downside is that some of the corporations might withhold documentation needed for driver development unless the license is lifted. Cheers, Brian Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
