Not a bad work of fiction
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cjcox Jan 08, 2007 9:15 PM EDT |
Very few things stated about Novell are true in this article. An interesting read... but mostly fiction. |
| dinotrac Jan 08, 2007 11:37 PM EDT |
What the heck? Did something get screwed up in the links? I didn't see anything about Novell, just a press release for a supposedly "open-source" billing system. |
| hchaudh1 Jan 09, 2007 6:14 AM EDT |
"supposedly", "open-source"? |
| DarrenR114 Jan 09, 2007 6:52 AM EDT |
It's hosted on SourceForge, so it is open source - but how fully OSS, I don't know yet. It's a java project designed to be built by ant and managed with Eclipse. So far, I like what I see. |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2007 7:56 AM EDT |
>"supposedly", "open-source"? My supposedly is only a function of no time to investigate, not a judgment that it isn't. |
| DarrenR114 Jan 09, 2007 8:18 AM EDT |
Dino - I figured that's where you were coming from, which is why I explained what I saw. What I don't know yet, but will probably find out within the next month now that I've found out about this thing, is whether or not there are "closed source" or "binary-only" components at the foundation of this software suite. To me, such a situation is even worse than simply being "freeware" or "shareware". -- Darren |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2007 9:19 AM EDT |
>To me, such a situation is even worse than simply being "freeware" or "shareware" Yeah. I'm not sure how to feel about that. For example, if somebody offers premium non-free components on a free platform that is fully libre, I might not mind if the free part is substantial and useful on its own, AND can be used as a development platform to add similar features to the non-free components. When you need the premium stuff to be worthwhile, it's a LIE to call it free. |
| jdixon Jan 09, 2007 9:31 AM EDT |
> When you need the premium stuff to be worthwhile, it's a LIE to call it free. How do you feel about DansGuardian then? That seems like it would be largely useless without the paid for rules. |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2007 9:50 AM EDT |
>How do you feel about DansGuardian then? Have never tried it, but that sounds like a good question. I notice that you are given the option to buy updated blacklists or to go to an url for free blacklists. I presume that you can edit the blacklists. In that content, the rules sound more like encapsulated service -- the service of keeping up with the changing web -- than software. Maybe not so bad. |
| jdixon Jan 09, 2007 10:04 AM EDT |
> In that content, the rules sound more like encapsulated service ... than software. I have no idea how good the free rules are. If the software is largely usable with them, then I wouldn't expect you to have a problem. If it's not, then it seems it would match your description exactly. I agree that rules should be considered a service, not software, though. But what good would free software be if it required paid for rules to operate? That would put you in a situation very similar to DRM'ed modules I'd think. Hmm, tis a puzzlement. |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2007 10:07 AM EDT |
>But what good would free software be if it required paid for rules to operate? That would put you in a situation very similar to DRM'ed modules I'd think. Hmm, tis a puzzlement. No. DRM locks you out. If you can obtain or develop your own rules, you are not locked out. Having the freedom to use the update service makes the software more useful, but doesn't impinge on your freedom. I think. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!