fsfe-france
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Fsfe-france] Re: pgAdmin is proprietary software


From: Alexandre Dulaunoy
Subject: RE: [Fsfe-france] Re: pgAdmin is proprietary software
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 23:23:01 +0200 (CEST)

On Sun, 18 May 2003, Dave Page wrote:

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alexandre Dulaunoy [mailto:address@hidden 
> > Sent: 18 May 2003 19:11
> > To: Dave Page
> > Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [Fsfe-france] Re: pgAdmin is proprietary software
> > 
> > 
> > > Question: Where exactly have we said that pgAdmin is Free 
> > Software or 
> > > Open Source by the FSF's definition?
> > > Answer: Nowhere.
> > 
> > It's written : 
> > 
> > http://pgadmin.postgresql.org/pgadmin2.php?ContentID=6
> > 
> > "pgAdmin II  is an open  source application written  using Microsoft's
> > Visual  Basic  6.0  Service  Pack   5.  It  is  built  around  4  main
> > components:"
> 
> And it is open source to take the literal interpretation of the words
> (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=open). I purposefully didn't
> write Open Source because that would imply special meaning to the words.
> I'm assuming the FSF or OSI haven't trademarked the word 'open' yet?

That's true, "Open Source" is not trademarked. 

http://opensource.org/press_releases/certified-open-source.html

The discussion was around that the current license of pgAdmin. pgAdmin
is  not  free  (following  the  4 freedoms  (FSF))  or  "open  source"
(following  the   OSI  definition).  The  usage  of   the  terms  with
proprietary  software  is  not  forbidden  but  tend  to  confuse  the
end-user. 

> 
> > Do you  plan to change  the licensing to  be compatible with  
> > the Free Software definition or the OSI definition ? 
> 
> I'm happy to discuss the licence to find something mutually acceptable
> to the pgAdmin Development Team and *any* interested party provided that

If  I'm clearly  understand, you  want  to have  equality between  the
users. That's  why a free software  license seems a  good approach for
your project... ;-)

> party can act professionally without resorting to accusations of
> deception and general mud-slinging that we have been subjected to by
> other members of the address@hidden list.
> 
> As stated before, both by myself and Jean-Michel, the primary aims of
> the pgAdmin devteam are to:
> 
> - Ensure the software is *always* freely available to anyone, with
> source code if desired.
> 
> - To prevent commercial exploitation of our work without due credit and
> contribution back to the project (not us, the project itself).

If  I  take the  two  points, a  strong  "copyleft"  license is  doing
that... For  example, various  companies love to  use the  GNU General
Public License in order to avoid the "stealing" of their software. 

If  you want  contribution back  in  case of  redistribution, the  GNU
General Public License  or the Affero General Public  License is doing
that and quite well. 

I hope we can discuss the matter friendly.

Have a nice day,

adulau


-- 
--                   Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) -- http://www.foo.be/
--         http://pgp.ael.be:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x44E6CBCD
--         "Knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance
--                                that we can solve them" Isaac Asimov







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]