🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3619aba5.1445375@news.netcologne.de>,
	tmgreen@jollynet.de (Tim Green) writes:
>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.
>
>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.

I like it, but what if (say) lotus123 proved buggy, it depends on WhingeDoze,
do they have to release the WD source code? how do you prove that the bug
is from either one of the products rather than the other, or your PC...

SammyTheSnake
-- 
SammyTheSnake@HotMail.com
PHUAE@Warwick.ac.uk S.A.Penny@Warwick.ac.uk
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/3353/
Check out my (E)TLA refference page at http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~phuae/