Arkady V.Belousov wrote: >MD> Logically this fails as a false analogy. The putative idea of PD or open >MD> source is to maximize help to all who could use it. > > The idea behind free soft (and even open source) is a social/public >benefit: with free sources you shouldn't reinvent the wheel each time, when >author of original program losts intersts in it and kills it. > >MD> The released source >MD> code is not a dangerous item to use nor one to be treated with great care >MD> and concern for others' safety. > > _Unreleased_ source _is_ dangerous, because it requres extra resources >from society to reproduce same functionality (because competition or because >original source is killed).
You agree with me, although I can't tell if that was your intention. Public domain source is released and free, really free, and cannot be killed after release. No one on topic is stating that making source freely available is bad, or complimenting Microsoft et al for their closed software strategy. Although I do think closed and commercial/proprietary software is also a valid model, just not appropriate for anything related to community-based programming such as FreeDOS. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
