🚀 go-pugleaf

ian@airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor) writes:
> The NOS (KA9Q) TCP/IP program is not under the GPL.  Alpha Micro (an
> obscure computer company which makes computers which run a proprietary
> operating system, AMOS) ported it to their system.  They released an
> executable version only, without source.  Their version had several
> annoying bugs in it (it crashed after an hour or so, for example,
> requiring the system to be rebooted (this is less painful than
> rebooting under Unix, but more painful than MS-DOS)).  Reported bugs
> were simply filed, since they weren't interested in pushing the
> program.

Then what should have been done is that several AMOS users should have
re-ported it themselves and provided source code for their port.  Alpha
Micro would have been unable to sell their program without source, or
maybe even with source if it's as buggy as you suggest.  So next time they
ported a program, they would have done it properly and provided sources.

Again, look at MINIX.  It's commercial, not freely-redistributable, but
source is provided.  The license allows users to provide context diffs
against the source in order to upgrade the system.  A similar commercial
license would have been ideal for KA9Q, it seems to me.

Basically, your example is an argument in favour of available source code
and redistributable patches (i.e., a sensible license).  It's not really
an argument in favour of making everything freely redistributable.


mathew

-- 
Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices / If
you know where I can buy the CD "In Mysterious Ways" by John Foxx, please send
me email / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! / My PGP RSA public key is
available on request / Desperately seeking CD of "U2" by Negativland / 4 lines