25 Nov
2012
25 Nov
'12
10:17 p.m.
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 21:02 +0000, Folderol wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:52:12 +0100
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
I can't agree more :). And now I'll stop my noise ;).
For drivers we sometimes have no choice.
Regards,
Ralf
On Sun, 2012-11-25 at 20:23 +0000, Fons
Adriaensen wrote:
It's something that people can get quite heated about :(
Personally, I prefer stuff with the source available (just in case) - although
I'll probably hardly give it a glance. To persuade me otherwise, an application
would have to be really exceptional and quite unique. On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:05:44PM -0800, J.
Liles wrote:
+1
We are living in a free world. I prefer open source, but if somebody has
what ever reason not to open the source code, I can decide if I'll use
it or not, no need for that noise. You're not likely to get any respect from
this community unless/until you
release your source code under a free/libre license. Who have spent decades
and 10's of thousands of hours working on projects that we give away freely
and openly, your software is irrelevant and your request for respect is
borderline insulting.
If anything is 'borderline insulting' it's IMHO the above.
While I can't imagine any good reason for keeping mixer4 source
code closed, the only consequence this should (and will) bring
is the reduced amount of support the author will get from this
(LAU/LAD) community. It should not be any pretext for ad-hominem
comments. And don't forget that many on this list are using things
like Mixbus. Is Harrison 'borderline insulting' as well ?