valinux goes propietary?

smaffulli at smaffulli at
Mon Aug 27 14:02:21 UTC 2001

> "smaffulli at"<smaffulli at> writes:
> > Again, make believe it: one thing that everybody says is "sell
> > services on open source (or free software)" and VA just said they
> > can't.
> Did VA's background as a hardware company influence this?  Is their
> setup so tuned towards selling products that they can't sell services?

that sounds like a good point, thanks. It still leaves exposed the question
ESR backing up such a move: can we consider this as the final act of the
Open Source Initiative? Is OSI over now? Shall we say it? Or who else
should claim the end of OSI?

> On a more general point, I think we need a "Linuxmanship"-style page
> for free software.  I'm off to see what's out there... any got some
> suggestions?  (Basic question: how do we promote free software to each
> class of user?  There's the business markets at each level and the
> users of each type.)

What do you mean with "Linuxmanship"-style page? 
I wrote a very little paper (in Italian, though) on why it is worth releasing new
software as Free Software. I wrote it having in mind developers and explains
shortly why it is not worth considering other proprietary licenses and means
of distribution like free/shareware.
Originally i wrote that article in English to advocate the release of a specific
piece of software under the GPL.

Could you explain better your idea as I am not sure I understood you, sorry.


Stefano Maffulli aka Reed                   | Milano Linux User Group a close-up on italy  |
GPG key fingerprint: E052 1B13 EB1A A246 A32D  D672 FD30 E9D9 C436 BDCE
To err is really foul up requires the root password.

More information about the Discussion mailing list