On 5/17/06, Cameron Schlehuber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
While GPL'ed code does not equate directly to open source, I think a
logical case can be made for being able to mix open source and
proprietary code in the proper manner and not cause one to become the
other.
That's correct.
What is a bottle management utility? Sounds like something to tell you who
gets the next bottle of beer!
On Thursday 18 May 2006 08:49, Jon Parshall wrote:
On 5/17/06, Cameron Schlehuber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
While GPL'ed code does not equate directly to open source, I think a
On 5/15/06, Kevin Toppenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doesn't opensource+proprietary=proprietary?Hi Kevin-I'm not sure I understand the question. Surely you aren't suggesting that because certain interfaces provided by 3rd party software vendors are proprietary, that the entire solution is thus
On 5/17/06, Ben Mehling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These vendors (who, by the way, were wonderful to work
with) should not be slighted because they choose to market
and support commercial software.
I think that's a typo--by now we all know that commercial
isn't synonymous with proprietary.
But
On 5/17/06, Joseph Dal Molin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben,
You are correct in saying that Kevin's equation is incorrect..according
to the 9th OSI criteria, open source licenses must not insist that all
other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source
software.
I am no expert
I guess I was thinking of the VistA Imaging package that depends on a
commercial plug-in. The rest of the package is open-source, but none
of us can use it without purchasing that $1000 commercial part. So in
that case opensource + propietary(commercial) =
proprietary(commercial).
So with
On 5/17/06, Cameron Schlehuber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
While GPL'ed code does not equate directly to open source, I think a
logical case can be made for being able to mix open source and
proprietary code in the proper manner and not cause one to become the
other.
OK. I stand corrected.
AM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Fortune Magazine article on VistA
On 5/17/06, Joseph Dal Molin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben,
You are correct in saying that Kevin's equation is incorrect..according
to the 9th OSI criteria, open source licenses
On 5/17/06, Joseph Dal Molin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You are correct in saying that Kevin's equation is incorrect..My assumption was, based on the terseness of the reply, that I misunderstood the statement. I was asking for clarification of Kevin's question -- I may have jumped too quickly to
