--- "Bhaskar, KS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the myths that is part of the FUD spread by vendors whose
business models are not based on open source licenses is that software
based on open source licenses is not commercial. Please do not
inadvertently help spread this myth.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards
-- Bhaskar
How would you prefer that GT.M be described, if not open source? I can
understand your concern here, especially since many open source
projects are not commercially supported. I suppose a phrase like
"Commercial software with a GPL compatible license" (or something like
it) is possible, but it's awkward. Certainly, I want to refer to the
product in the appropriate manner.
===
Gregory Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as
being self-evident."
--Arthur Schopenhauer
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
