Re: Fw: Red Hat Linux end-of-life update and transition planning

[Rui Miguel Seabra <rms () 1407 org>]

On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 15:11, Jonathan A. Zdziarski wrote:
> I agree all code should be kept open...but I shouldn't be able to
> download someone else's book online and then sell it, now should I?

Let's change from book to software. There's no need for an analogy here.
I think I am right in assuming most of us understand more about software
creation than book creation.

If a program was released with a Free Software license, then yes you
should. However, since everyone also could, the selling business method
does not work very well.

That's why RedHat is not selling the software "per se" but the support
and access to update channels.

You agree in a contract that you'll only use what you get from that
support and updates on the registered machines (for which you will pay a
certain amount per machine).

Just get the CD's, remove the non-Free parts, et voila, there you go
with a 5 year EoL.

You might have to recompile the src.rpms to get he binaries though, but
that's not hard, is it?

Rui

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part