On 07/26/2009 11:06 AM, Pater Mann wrote:You don't have to release the source code to the public. It's perfectly
> To give an example. For a previous company, I wrote an EDI translator
> which was used in most of the company's products. This was a piece of
> software that is only of interest to businesses (only large companies
> use EDI) so the only result from releasing the source would be to make
> it much more difficult for the company to recoup its costs in
> developing it - the software would be of no use to the "public".
> Therefore I cannot agree that *all* software should become free.
normal to give the source code to the client on a project, and custom
software, written in-house is neither free software, nor the kind of
proprietary software that is released to the public, which is the real
Fsuk-manchester mailing list