On 1/24/07, karel Fassotte <karel.fassotte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: [snip]
My brother Steef is not very fond on binaries. He says the could should be free and open to develope and adapt to the wishes. I think Dmitry has a point, because he did a lot of work and does not want somebody to commercialize the software.
There are a number of open-source licenses that would allow the code to be released, and would allow others to modify and further develop the code, but that would not allow a commercial product to be built with the codebase (without, say, that product itself being open-source). The best-known example of such a license is the GNU GPL: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License There are also a wide variety of open-source licenses available, designed for all sorts of different scenarios and intentions of developers: http://opensource.org/licenses/ Although I understand and appreciate that not all want to write open-source software, I don't consider fear of commercialization to be a very valid excuse :) best, -chris