🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 06:14:30 GMT, tmgreen@jollynet.de (Tim Green)
wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Oct 1998 09:53:37 GMT, phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut) wrote:
>
>>What matters is that with open source, there is free competition among =
>those
>>that can provide the service of bugfixing.  Which means that the bug =
>usually=20
>>gets fixed at extremely low cost.
>
>How about this approach:=20
>
>1) Anybody has the basic right to sell their software for money and
>withold the code, provided that the software is fully functional and
>entirely bug-free.

There will never be any 'commercial code'  released if it must
satisfy so generic a qualification. No other product must satisfy
this qualification, why should software?

>2) As soon as the software proves to have bugs that impair its
>usefulness the vendor *must* release all the source code for peer
>review and correction "=E0 la Linux", including all the source code of
>any dependencies -- in the case of M$ Word that would mean the Windows
>source code, for example.

As soon as the product fails, take it in for repair like any other
failed product or return it and get your money back. Much simpler.
That's what I've always done.

Besides, if my word processor were to fail, how could that oblidge
M$ to release the code to their os?