Re: Open Source

[Simon Cozens <simon@example.com>]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 09:24:58PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> C'mon, Simon, the rest of your examples should be sufficient to make
> your point. 

You'd think. :)

> It just isn't true for XEmacs, though.  I don't think
> it's true for Apache, either.

I'm not sure how Apache works.

> And then there's the HURD, where last I checked the maintainership
> was the NULL set.  ;-)

Cool, so all developers are maintainers? :)

> How about Mozilla, GTK, GNOME, ...?

Miguel is still Mr. GNOME, I think.

> Oh, and by the way, the development branch (important because that's
> where the management issues arise---unlike the stable XEmacs, which is
> actively maintained, GNU Ghostscript is simply an obsolete stable
> Aladdin Ghostscript) of Ghostscript is not open source; AFPL doesn't
> qualify.

Hm. Have you had a look at
http://www.artofcode.com/ghostscript/openletter.html ?

Raph's a good guy.

Simon
-- 
Do not underestimate the value of print statements for debugging.