On 18 November 2011 14:14, Robert T. Short
<oct...@phaselockedsystems.com> wrote:
> Martin's point makes a lot of sense. However, I still don't see the
> problem with hosting non-free software in the forge project.
>
> Personally, I think the notion that non-free software is somehow bad is
> ludicrous.
You really don't think that license managers, software patents, NDAs,
non-competition agreements, hidden source code, secret algorithms, and
forbidding your users from doing whatever they want with the software
is at all bad?
That's what the opposite of free software is. And that's what I don't
think should be encouraged by Octave-Forge.
> I have long been a proponent of the free (and not just $) software
> community,
I am not sure, but you seem to be suggesting that free software can't
be commercial or it's not associated to money. A lot of good ventures
have been built on selling free software, and you should also pay for
free software:
https://my.fsf.org/donate/working-together/octave
Just because we won't restrict your software or make you install
license managers doesn't mean we don't want your money.
- Jordi G. H.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure
contains a definitive record of customers, application performance,
security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
