This is one of the bugs that is essential to get out of the open source movement. It costs real money, and even more importantly, real attention, to open source something. The required money and attention will go down as there is more agreement on open source licenses and they are tested in court. Until then, however, the cost is real, and I think dismissing it reduces the respect that open source will get from business, does a disservice to the companies who have spent that effort and money, and blinds open source advocates to the barriers they need to help overcome to get more things open sourced.
At 03:41 AM 6/1/99 -0700, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>At 03:34 AM 6/1/99 , Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
>>On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>>> Ping, is your bug tracking system ready for prime time? Are you
>>> open source it?
>>[-] Alas, no. It was developed entirely on company time.
>>I'd have to ask permission, and very likely the answer would be no.
>Considering the likelihood that ILM will derive revenue from selling your
>bug-tracking software, one might say...
> Bureaucratic Inertia:
> The Real Menace
>Their likely decision is a pure destruction of value -- a decision with no
>possible benefit to anyone. This is the story of most businesses, large and
>small, all across America and probably the world. Coming soon to a theater