[time-nuts] Open source
scmcgrath at gmail.com
Fri Dec 7 21:08:32 UTC 2012
that was my point code is open source means open for inspection by end-user. The tool chain is irrelevant unless it comes from GPL or similar licenses. Back in the mainframe days most code was proprietary but distributed to customer in the form of source code to be compiled by the end user. That code was 'Open Source' e
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2012, at 12:09 PM, David Kirkby <david.kirkby at onetel.net> wrote:
> On 7 December 2012 15:00, Scott McGrath <scmcgrath at gmail.com> wrote:>
>> What most people think about when they hear about open source is code released under variants of the GPL which require that code released to the public built with GPL tools be made available for no more than the cost of distribution ie you can charge for the cost of the optical disk and postage but no more.
> Whether the source code is open has nothing to do with what the tool
> chain that might be used.
> People write open-source code for things like FPGAs which need
> expensive proprietry tools to load into the FPGA.
> You can write programs for MATLAB, Mathematica, Labview etc and
> open-source them. The fact they need pretty expensive software to be
> of any use is irrelevant.
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
More information about the time-nuts