To: tbird AT caldera DOT com Cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com, caldera-opendos AT rim DOT caldera DOT com References: <19970919221921 DOT 32290 DOT qmail AT caldera DOT caldera DOT com> Message-Id: From: "Arkady V.Belousov" Date: Sat, 20 Sep 1997 03:53:36 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Locus Reply-To: ark AT mos DOT ru Subject: Re: For Sale or For Free: The Debate Continues Lines: 49 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk X-Comment-To: tbird AT caldera DOT com Hi! 19-σΕΞ-97 16:19 tbird AT caldera DOT com (tbird AT caldera DOT com) wrote to opendos AT delorie DOT com: [...] > Here's some more info to confuse the whole situation. When Caldera > purchased Novell DOS, it had every intention of releasing the full > source code, including utility source. Except of course that exceptions > kept mounting as we moved forward. We had to make special exceptions > for code we didn't own (like Personal NetWare), This is justify. > or for code that was > quagmired in a strange repository system, or decide what to do with > software that no one on the entire planet could reasonably recompile. This is not justify. Publishing such code mean nothing bad - _most_ users want sources only for semantics analyzing and bugs finding and reporting. And publishing current code gives you more time for source refinement. Moreover, I think step-by-step publishing (done next small part - publish they as "update") is best strategy. [...] > - some utility source exposes code which Caldera does not > want to fall into the hands of competitors (no, not Microsoft > or FreeDOS, or the hacker community - don't be silly. Caldera > has non-imaginary competitors in the embedded market that would > like to see, for example, the source code to NWCDEX - I had > one say exactly this to me at the Embedded Systems Conference > trade show last year - Hard to imagine since NWCDEX has a > bad reputation for bugs, but true none-the-less.) Who prohibit you publish not all utilities at now? For example - I want to analyze and report where is bug in xcopy. What tricks used in xcopy? In attrib? But no one of these utilities published! B*( > what is available. I would recommend that people continue to lobby in a > nice way for specific source pieces they are really interested in doing > something with. Maybe someone from Caldera will change their mind. The > negative reaction that occurred on opendos AT caldera DOT com was detrimental > rather than constructive at changing minds at Caldera. I restore lost by you CC: with opendos AT delorie DOT com and add caldera-opendos AT rim DOT caldera DOT com.