-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, Brook Humphrey wrote...
>> The source would have to be freely available for it to be classed >> as Open Source, in which case they may as well turn the windows >> version Open Source too. They may be able to release binary >> versions under maybe the GPL license for example at which point I >> don't think source code needs to be distributed. I've not read the >> GPL license fully myself. > Man how much do you guys know about linux. A program doesn't have to > be open source. Especially in the case of the bat. There are many > companies that put out programs for linux without it being open > source. You were the one that mentioned the open sourceness of TB! ;) And I know there are a lot of companies that write programs for linux that aren't open source. > One last thing I ment offical as in why don't we discuss it here. That doesn't make it official in any way. RitLabs have no hand in the way this list is run, and is not really an official method of contacting them, or posting suggestions. Moved to TBOT as I can see this may be a long one ;) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 6.5.8ckt iQA/AwUBPWJUZiuD6BT4/R9zEQI+rQCeIWm5q6II4ySHZbbSxnTIIqsdgcoAoMHd YbBLJx1AagEsDKNLE1FqVop/ =FWdL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ________________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
