Getting off topic here - this discussion might be best continued over in macperl-forum (a list which was created expressly for such related but offtopic sorts of discussions :-) At 10:15 -0500 6/30/99, w e b s l a v e wrote: > The shareware vs. 'freeware' thing... I think it is affected by the > release it, doesn't the GPL allow for charging money for the software, > but still require that the source be open? Wouldn't this mean all the > Mac users would pay for it, except the ones that have compilers and feel > like building it? A clarification. *nix Free Software (e.g. GNU, GPL, and the like) is free as in "Free Speech" not as in "Free Beer" On the Mac, we've got the concept of free software as in free beer, not free speech. So on *nix, yes, it's quite reasonable to charge. But you can't forbid the guy you sell it to from giving it away. Nevertheless, the point of the GNU Free Software project is "Make the source code available". People tell Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation (and GNU) "My boss doesn't believe software is real if he doesn't have to pay for it". Richard Stallman replies "How much does he want to pay? I'll take a check". At 08:27 -0400 6/30/99, Paul J. Schinder wrote: > Partly it's a "what would I do > with your source code anyway?" thing from the end user. True, but some of us end users might want to _look_ at the source even if we don't have the tool to recompile it. Oh, sorry, I forgot. That makes me a "power user" and perilously close to a developer, not an "end user". I forgot the definitions :-) I agree that it's a cultural thing. It's a culture I'd like to change. Followups to macperl-forum please -- -- |\ _,,,---,,_ Vicki Brown <vlb@cfcl.com> ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ Journeyman Sourceror: Scripts & Philtres |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' P.O. Box 1269 San Bruno CA 94066 '---''(_/--' `-'\_) http://www.cfcl.com/~vlb http://www.macperl.com ===== Want to unsubscribe from this list? ===== Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to macperl-request@macperl.org