Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: oss revisited (briefly!)

From: tim:johnsons-web at: 10-Feb-2004 8:13

* "Robert M. M=FCnch" <[robert--muench--robertmuench--de]> [040210 03:20]:
> On Sun, 8 Feb 2004 09:36:10 -0900, Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> > wrote: > > > It is not just possible, but is probable, that a 'tipping point' > > will be reached that will cause a sharp spike in increased linux > > use. If there is not an 'open source' rebol, rebol will lose out. > > Hi, I never undestand what the problem is? What's the problem with Rebol > not being open-source? It doesn't cost hundred-of-thousands of $s to use. > So if you are doing things that will create revenue, you can afford a > license, if not use the free interpreter. > > If we would talk about Oracle database systems here, I would agree to do > cost-cutting. > > But, all those open-source demagogues, if you can show-up with a > business-model that let RT make some money from their work, I will be > quite but otherwise it's just a techie POV with no business know-how > behind it. > > And, BTW: Those not caring about Rebol because not being open-source have > a problem ;-) > > > Note: this is my opinion, and I don't wish to be involved in > > or initiate an 'OS war'. > > Well, why not? If someone can tell me a really benefit Rebol being > open-source I might change my POV. Sorry, if this sound a bit harsh here, > but only moaning without showing a solution is not that professional.
By now you've probably read my thoughts about 'open architecture' as a opposed to 'open source'. And I'm personally not a real 'open source' fanatic. I'm more interested in resources than source code. In fact, as a long-time C programmer, I'm afraid that if I saw any of Carl's code, it would just make me feel stoopid. :-) cheers tim -- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]>