RE: Open Source

["Jonathan Shore" <jshore@example.com>]

Thanks for your thoughtful response -

> From: Frank BENNETT [mailto:bennett@example.com]
> required by the Mozilla license), and that's that.  (I misspoke in my
> response to Jonathan S's post above when I said that if the product is
> popular, the source would be too -- the assumption *must* be that
> there is no
> product)

That is correct - there is no software product.  The linux-related work I am
doing is just a means to an end.  To be able to use the linux platform in a
number of multimedia settings.  Our core work at the moment revolves around
media and not software (though I am a CS by training).


> I don't have time".  Jonathan has responded by saying, I think,
> that the local
> benefits to the firm are not great enough to justify the effort
> of publishing.
> I argued in return that he loses benefits of coordination with
> the original
> archive by holding the source closely.  But all of this assumes (or should

This may be too real-world for some of you open-source advocates out there,
but in this specific case, going a distributed open-source route in the
short term would mean failure to deliver in time.

JS