----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Waugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Source Code
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Roy Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > SNIP > > > >that is the optimist view. However there is nothing in the license > > >that would guarantee me that the source code would be continuously > > >available in the future. > > >There is nothing in the license that would guarantee me any of my > > >changes will get back into official SMSQ. > > >There is nothing in the license to guarantee me that official > > >or inofficial binaries of SMSQ will be available. > > There is also nothing in the licence that will guarantee that you will > > not be run over by a bus - stop being silly. > > All of this continual bickering and hair splitting is getting needlessly > > introspective > > -- > > Roy Wood > > > > >From a users viewpoint > > when TT allowed smsqe to become open I reckon many users thought GREAT news > as TT was giving part time support to it ( understandable and no disrespect > intended ), we looked forward to further development and goodies that would > justify our continued use of the various system that use it. > Well I have to tell you guys if as much effort had gone into code as has > gone into nitpicking and general etimewasting then we would have the Space > Shuttle running on SMSQE by now ( just don't enter any very long planet > names though ). > > Just do it - while I still have the faith > > all the best - Bill > > > I agree entirely with Bill, having spent many thousands of pounds running several businesses with QLs and SMSQ/E, including Q40. We stopped because of the lack of development keeping pace with the market. I was delighted when SMSQ/E was made open source, and looked forward to a revival in QL fortunes, alas, this is not so, its not to be open source, which is more to do with vested interests trying to 'grab the ball', than with what will be best for QL users, and th QL. I may say that if TT had provided the support promised to Qubide, Q40 and SMSQ/E, we may have still been running 8 QLs full time, and spending a goodly sum each year with traders, to TTs benefit. I, as a user, only see that TT at last has given access to code, that is long overdue( never mind copyrights, what about my rights, I have paid good money on the promise of continuing development. I feel badly treated in this.) and should have happened years ago. Now the pack are fighting over the bones. At the end of the day it is we users who decide to continue with support for the QL, or to go elsewhere and let the predators starve to death. Whats wrong with the Linux setup, it works. SMSQ would work as well, even if there were a couple of versions, that at least adds competition to differant systems and leads to healthy development. Tony, Dave sorry to punctuation and grammar, can't see keyboard for red clouds Regards to all Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
