[Mono-list] Examples of proprietary code developed on Mono
Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:45:45 +0200
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 20:54 -0400, Jonathan Pryor wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 14:36 +0200, Julien Gilli wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 06:48 -0400, Jonathan Pryor wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 12:33 +0200, Julien Gilli wrote:
> > > Generally speaking, if it's non-commercial it would be considered to =
> > > proprietary, even if source code is present, as the non-commercial
> > > aspect greatly limits the target audience (why work on something you
> > > can't possibly sell?).
> > Well, it seems to me that many FOSS projects do it.=20
> As I mentioned, a commercial license means that the code *can* be sold
> and used in a commercial application. =20
It seems all the confusion is due to my misunderstanding of your words
(and my bad english). I thought that you meant *must* instead of *can*.
> > What does make such FOSS projects as gcc, the autotools, GNOME, Apache,
> > OpenLDAP, and so on inherently commercial to you ?
> The fact that I have the option to *sell* these tools if I so choose.
So again, we agree on this point. My point is that we shouldn't over
simplificate our words when talking to somebody coming from the
proprietary software world about the different ways to distribute FOSS
software. I think that the answer to the following question :
"Was wondering if anybody could tell me of any instances where=20
proprietary software has been developed using Mono? "
which was :
"The FAQ explicitly states that you can write commercial programs with
might confuse things a little bit by creating an identity relationship
between commercial and proprietary software, which are two differents
things (as you clearly mentionned above).
Julien Gilli <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----