On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 01:38:32PM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote: > > It's also worth noting that hypothetically, if I was a > > company releasing > > updates based on an open-source product, I may have incentive to avoid > > making those updates useful on said product, otherwise people would > > download my updates and not pay me for the software. > > Wouldn't that be against the open source lic?
Not that I'm aware of, why would it be? If I produce something on my
own (like new rules) and publish it, I'm not bound by someone else's
licensing. In this case, if I'm following the code license and make
modifications such that new rules that I produce are in a proprietary
format, then that's perfectly valid. With SA 3, I could even make the
config parsing a plugin and not have to modify any of the base code.
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
"I came here to kick butt and chew gum, and I'm all out of gum."
- They Live (movie)
pgpq3zHGcsyJy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
