[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ok. Your email sig says you work for Red Hat. Does Red Hat sign
indemnification and liquidation
clauses for systems it sells?
Umm? Red Hat does not want to profit by the systems it sells?
I think your stockholders will be very interested in that position.
I understand the moral position. But it has to be supported by
business practices that manage risks for customers. No offense
intended, but that is how open source can become a credible
competitor. Money matters to survival.
len
From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard@redhat.com]
> I understand that. The line I am drawing is to distinguish those
> who do sell big systems based on open source to the total community.
> It is precisely that IBM/RH must indemnify and what I read contradicts
> what you assert: they aren't doing that. That is the problem.
Huh ? What kind of crack is flowing in that channel again ???
But please don't try to speak for this community if you're not really
part of it or don't understand how/why this was built up and successful
(not specifically for you Claude, but in general).
Money is not the reason why this was built. MS phobia either, those
are completely secundary issues w.r.t. Open Source/free software development
and success..
|
